Book 1 - City of St. Petersburg

THE NEW 

ST. PETERSBURG 

PIER 

BASIS OF DESIGN 

BOOK 1 

NOVEMBER 26, 2012 

MICHAEL MALTZAN ARCHITECTURE, INC.

1 


THE NEW ST. PETERSBURG PIER 

ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA 

BOOK 1 

NOVEMBER 26, 2012 

Prepared for 

The City of St. Petersburg 

A/E Team 

Michael Maltzan Architecture, Inc. 

Buro Happold 

Wannemacher Jensen Architects, Inc. 

Tom Leader Studio 

Applied Technology Management 

Janicki Environmental, Inc. 

McLaren Engineering Group 

L’Observatoire International 

Construction Manager 

Skanska USA Building Inc.

CONTENT: 

BASIS OF DESIGN BOOK 1 

1 

2 

INTRODUCTION 

Executive Statement 

Background 

Purpose of Report 

Description of Work Performed 

Organization of Report 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Introduction 

Definitions 

Component Summary 

Cost Summary 

A/E Team Organizational Chart 

Project Schedule 

1 - 1 

1 - 2 

1 - 5 

1 - 6 

1 - 7 

2 - 1 

2 - 2 

2 - 8 

2 - 10 

2 - 12 

2 - 13 

3 

GENERAL PLANNING CRITERIA 

Introduction 

Public Outreach Notes 

Underwater Feature Outreach Summary 

Uplands Usage Suggestions 

Pier Advisory Task Force Report Summary 

Site and Urban Design Criteria 

Existing Infrastructure 

Architectural Criteria 

Engineering Criteria 

Marina Criteria 

Underwater Feature Criteria 

Fire and Life Safety Requirements 

Accessibility and Code Requirements 

Permitting and Demolition 

3 - 1 

3 - 4 

3 - 16 

3 - 17 

3 - 20 

3 - 22 

3 - 54 

3 - 61 

3 - 84 

3 - 104 

3 - 108 

3 - 122 

3 - 126 

3 - 136 

4 

COMPONENT PLANNING CRITERIA 

Introduction 

Program Components 

Existing Conditions 

Component Descriptions 

4 - 1 

4 - 2 

4 - 4 

4 - 9 

5 

BASIS OF DESIGN CONCEPT ANALYSIS 

Introduction 

Engineering Narrative 

Basis of Design Concept Plans and Diagrams 

5 - 1 

5 - 2 

5 - 5 

6 

CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK: 

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION 

Cost Estimate Process 

Local Business Enterprise Participation 

Preliminary Schedule 

6 - 1 

6 - 4 

6 - 15 

7 

OPERATING EXPENSE AND MAINTENANCE 

ESTIMATES 

Operating Expense and Maintenance Estimates 

7 - 1 

MICHAEL MALTZAN ARCHITECTURE, INC. 1


CONTENT: 


A-O 

APPENDICES 

Appendix A 

St. Petersburg Pier Site Observations Report, June 27-28, 2012 

(Buro Happold) 

Appendix B 

Conceptual Fire Safety Strategy Presentation, September 26, 

2012 (Buro Happold) 

Appendix C 

Conceptual Fire Safety Strategy Presentation, Meeting Minutes 

(Buro Happold) 

Appendix D 

General Site Conditions Meeting Minutes, June 27, 2012 

(McLaren Engineering Group) 

Appendix E 

Environmental Resource Permit Application, August 2012 

Appendix F 

Underwater Feature Outreach Project: Meeting Minutes from 

Technical Workshops and Interviews 

Appendix G 

Hydrodynamics and Flushing of the Proposed Docking Facilities 

at St. Petersburg Pier 

Appendix H 

Pier Advisory Task Force Report 

Appendix I 

Vision/Guiding Principles and Context for the Preparation of a 

Downtown Waterfront Master Plan, December 2011 

Appendix J 

Skanska - Key Personnel 

Appendix K ASCE 24-05: Flood Resistant Design and 

Construction 

Appendix L 

City Pier Building Foundation Evaluation, March 1, 2010 (Moffatt 

and Nichol) 

Appendix M 

Cost Model (Skanska) 

Appendix N 

Life Cycle Cost Analysis Report 

Appendix O 

St. Petersburg Pier Request for Qualifications - International 

Design Competition 

2 

THE NEW ST. PETERSBURG PIER

LIST OF FIGURES 

1 

2 

3 

INTRODUCTION 

(none) 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Fig 2.1 

Fig 2.2 

Program Components of the New St. Petersburg Pier 

Current Project Schedule Agreed Upon by the A/E 

Team and the Construction Manager as of 11/19/2012 

GENERAL PLANNING CRITERIA 

Fig 3.1 

Fig 3.2 

Fig 3.3 

Fig 3.4 

Fig 3.5 

Fig 3.6 

Fig 3.7 

Fig 3.8 

Fig 3.9 

Fig 3.10 

Fig 3.11 

Fig 3.12 

Fig 3.13 

Fig 3.14 

Fig 3.15 

Fig 3.16 

Fig 3.17 

Fig 3.18 

Fig 3.19 

Fig 3.20 

Fig 3.21 

Fig 3.22 

Fig 3.23 

Fig 3.24 

Fig 3.25 

Fig 3.26 

Fig 3.27 

Fig 3.28 

Public Presentations and Information Sessions 

Site Context 

Current Uses of Site 

Existing Pier Head 

Historic Buildings 

Points of Interest Adjacent to the Pier 

Aerial View of Existing Pier 

View of Uplands, 2nd Avenue NE and North Basin 

West Elevation of Inverted Pyramid Building 

View of Demens Landing Park and Municipal Marina 

View of Skyline from Observation Deck 

View of Pier from South-West 

View of Inverted Pyramid from Pier Approach 

View of Pier Approach 

View of Inverted Pyramid from South 

Bird’s Eye View of Pier, Pier Approach and Uplands 

View of Skyline from Pier Approach 

Zoning Plan 

Height Limitations in Vicinity of Albert Whitted Airport 

Height Limitations 

2012 Seagrass and Essential Fish Habitat Survey 

Results 

Pier Deck Demolition Plan 

View Looking East Along 2nd Avenue NE 

Existing Site Access Routes 

Community Redevelopment Areas 

Datum Conversion Diagram 

Flood Insurance Rate Map for Pinellas County, Florida, 

and Incorporated Areas 

Wind Rose for Albert Whitted Airport 

Fig 3.29 Weather Data Gathered Between the Years 1981-2010 

for St. Petersburg, FL. 

Fig 3.30 

Soil Profile Data 



LIST OF FIGURES 

(continued) 

Fig 3.31 

Fig 3.32 

Fig 3.33 

Fig 3.34 

Fig 3.35 

Fig 3.36 

Fig 3.37 

Fig 3.38 

Fig 3.39 

Fig 3.40 

Fig 3.41 

Fig 3.42 

Fig 3.43 

Fig 3.44 

Fig 3.45 

Fig 3.46 

Fig 3.47 

Fig 3.48 

Fig 3.49 

Fig 3.50 

Fig 3.51 

Fig 3.52 

Fig 3.53 

Fig 3.54 

Fig 3.55 

Fig 3.56 

Fig 3.57 

Fig 3.58 

Fig 3.59 

Fig 3.60 

Fig 3.61 

Fig 3.62 

Fig 3.63 

Fig 3.64 

Fig 3.65 

Fig 3.66 

Hydrographic Survey 

Existing Site Services Plan 

Potential Photovoltaic Panel and Wind Turbine Array 

Potential Sustainable Lens Features: Examples of 

Photovoltaic Panels 

Potential Sustainable Lens Features: Examples of Small 

Scale Wind Turbines 

Albert Whitted Airport Flight Paths 

Midday Sun Reflection Study Along North-South Flight 

Path 

Summer Shading Study 

Winter Shading Study 

Example of Metal Panels on a Metal Frame Sub 

Structure 

Example of Ipe Boardwalk 

Improved Pier Access Plan 

Pier Trolley Circuit 

Modified Parking for the New Pier 

Pier Activities 

Marina Phasing Diagram 

Example of Floating Dock System 

Serviceability of Floating Dock System 

Breakwater Capacity of Floating Dock System 

Marine Science in Classrooms 

Habitat Enhancement by Local Scientific Community 

Real-Time Monitoring and Imaging Technologies 

Linkage to the Underwater Feature via the Internet 

Habitat Sensitive Underwater Lighting 

Docent-Led Tours 

Enhanced Local Environment: Habitat Population and 

Protection 

Artificial Reef Construction Options Built Precedents 

Tampa Bay Artificial Reefs 

Plan Showing Existing Piles to Remain 

Plan Showing Reuse of Existing Piles 

Maximum Occupant Loads 

Example of Risk Category I Structure 

Example of Risk Category II Structure 

Example of Risk Category III Structure 

Example of Risk Category IV Structure 

Project Zones 

4 


4 

5 

6 

7 

COMPONENT PLANNING CRITERIA 

Fig 4.1 

Fig 4.2 

Fig 4.3 

Fig 4.4 

Fig 4.5 

Fig 4.6 

Fig 4.7 

Fig 4.8 

Fig 4.9 

Fig 4.10 

Fig 4.11 

Fig 4.12 

Program Components of the New St. Petersburg Pier 

Comparison of Existing and New Piers in Plan 

Comparison of Existing and New Piers in Elevation 

Comparison of Existing Inverted Pyramid Building and 

New St. Petersburg Pier 

Welcome Mat Program Component and Related 

Subcomponents 

Hub Program Component and Related 

Subcomponents 

Overwater Drive Program Component and Related 

Subcomponents 

Overwater Bridge Program Component and Related 

Subcomponents 

Lens Canopy Program Component and Related 

Subcomponents 

Promontory Program Component and Related 

Subcomponents 

Marina Program Component and Related 

Subcomponents 

Underwater Feature Program Component and Related 

Subcomponents 

BASIS OF DESIGN CONCEPT ANALYSIS 

List of drawings provided on page 5-1 

CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK: 

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION 

Fig 6.1 Screenshots of 3D Model Used for Costing 

Fig 6.2 Small Business Luncheons and Related Sponsored 

Events by Skanska 

Fig 6.3 Tampa Bay Area Skanska Projects 

Fig 6.4 Areas of Residence of Skanska’s Tampa Employees 

Fig 6.5 Port Canaveral Cruise Terminal No. 6 

Fig 6.6 Florida Polytech 

Fig 6.7 Sample Database of Pinellas County Subcontractors 

OPERATING EXPENSE AND MAINTENANCE ESTIMATES 

(none) 


1INTRODUCTION

EXECUTIVE STATEMENT 

The new St. Petersburg Pier is an extraordinary opportunity to 

create a new landmark that is representative of both the people 

and the City of St. Petersburg. As a team, we have come to 

know the City, its people and its landscape. We recognize the 

challenge of continuing the legacy first begun by William Straub, 

as well as the importance of this key public space for all of St. 

Petersburg. The City and the Pier have a shared identity, one 

that has become inextricably linked over time. Given this close 

relationship, it is especially important for this new icon to reflect 

and resonate with the City and its defining characteristic - its 

connection to the water. 

From the onset, the design team has strived to provide the City 

with a Pier that is more than a simple, static object. Rather, our 

goal is to provide an accessible, flexible, and functional icon 

that is as much a public park as it is a breathtaking sculpture on 

the water. No longer a simple terminus, the Pier becomes an 

unparalleled place for new experiences from fishing to dining 

and falling in love. 

Throughout the Basis of Design effort, we have worked closely 

with the City, its citizens and a multitude of experts to identify 

goals and desires for the new St. Petersburg Pier. This process 

has strengthened and enriched the design, making it truly 

adapted to the City as a whole and serving as a beacon of 

optimism for the future. 

This Report has been prepared by Michael Maltzan Architecture, 

Inc. and the A/E team for the City of St. Petersburg. The contents 

of the Basis of Design have been developed according to the 

City’s project requirements and form a living document that 

describes the technical approach and design parameters used 

for the project. 

While a tremendous amount of thought, effort and collaborative 

evaluation is embedded in this Report, the Basis of Design 

marks only the beginning of the design process, and a rigorous 

dialogue will be sustained throughout the development of the 

project. 

At this juncture, with the committed assistance of Skanska, 

the design team has been able to provide a project that 

is representative of the competition entry, and that meets 

the stipulated budget assigned to the cost of work. This 

achievement was no small feat and its significance should not be 

overlooked when evaluating this phase of the project. While a 

considerable amount of work, challenges, and tough decisions 

lie ahead, the team is prepared to undertake them with the 

City of St. Petersburg as a partner. Most importantly, the same 

skill and commitment will be applied to this project in the next 

phases in order to maintain the budget and the integrity of the 

design throughout the further development of the new Pier. 

MICHAEL MALTZAN ARCHITECTURE, INC. 1 - 1


1 INTRODUCTION 

BACKGROUND 

The St. Petersburg Pier is the central element connecting 

downtown St. Petersburg with its waterfront and has become 

one of the City’s most iconic and visible structures. When William 

Straub became part owner and editor of the St. Petersburg 

Times in 1901, he led the effort to set aside downtown waterfront 

property for the public to enliven community and generate 

well-being. This notion endures today with the City’s many 

initiatives for the preservation and enhancement of urban life 

and landscape. 

A number of piers have been constructed on the project site 

dating back to 1896. Notable structures include the Brantley 

Pier between 1896 and 1906, the Electric Pier between 1906 and 

1914, the Municipal Pier (constructed 10 feet north of the Electric 

Pier) between 1913 and 1921, the Million Dollar Pier between 

1926 and 1967, and the Inverted Pyramid building, which 

replaced the Million Dollar Pier building in 1973. 

Today, all superstructure components of the Pier approach 

and head, save for the 1973 Inverted Pyramid base, harken 

back to its original 1926 construction. Despite repairs, many 

of these superstructure elements suffer from concrete and 

structural deterioration due to corrosion, exposure and aging 

of the reinforcing steel causing spalls, cracks and delamination. 

Continued general repairs do not increase the load carrying 

capacity of the structure and are not a viable long-term solution. 

A structural assessment document prepared by Moffatt & Nichol 

appears as Appendix L of the BOD report. 

April 2005 - March 2009 

The City of St. Petersburg and Pinellas County approved 

amendments to the Intown Redevelopment Plan to provide 

$50 million for a Pier project. On December 11, 2008, City 

Council met at a Pier Visioning Workshop and recommended 

the establishment of the Pier Advisory Task Force. On March 

19, 2009 City Council formally approved the creation of the 

Task Force and assigned its membership, to provide multiple 

redevelopment alternatives, review the status of the Pier, 

consult with citizens, persons with experience in architectural 

development matters and other appropriate persons. 

June 2010 

The Pier Advisory Task Force Final Report was released. City 

Council authorized an international competition in July 2011 to 

enhance the creative process for the redevelopment of the St. 

Petersburg Pier, a process recommended by the Pier Advisory 

Task Force. The Task Force indicated that the conclusions in 

the report can be summed up by a quote from the Lambert 

Advisory: “the Pier would not be the Pier without a pier, and 

thereby the City would lose a major drawing card for Downtown 

St. Petersburg. What the configuration, size or length of the pier 

is [sic] less important from a marketing/positioning perspective 

than the fact that a pier in some form or fashion continues to 

exist” (Pier Advisory Task Force Report, p.40). 

1 - 2 


The full report can be downloaded as a pdf at the following 

web address: http://www.stpete.org/news/the_pier/docs/Pier_ 

Advisory_Task_Force_Final_Report_6_3_10.pdf 

June 2011 

The City of St. Petersburg released a request for qualifications 

(RFQ) document for a design competition. Stage 1 of the 

competition called for multi-disciplinary teams interested 

in being considered for the services of redeveloping the St. 

Petersburg Pier to register and submit a design approach, 

relevant project examples and team background and 

experience. Concurrently a five (5) member jury reflecting a 

diverse range of expertise and perspective was assembled 

and approved by City Council to review the applicants and 

select the winning design. The jury was comprised of a City 

Council representative, a County commissioner - both City of St. 

Petersburg residents - and three experts in the respective fields 

of architecture, urban design and planning, and development/ 

economics. Of the three experts, one was from Tampa while the 

other two were from outside the State of Florida. 

August 2011 

From a group of twenty-three (23) international applicants, 

nine (9) were shortlisted for further consideration by the Jury. 

The City then invited a shortlist of three (3) teams of Finalists 

(architectural firms with their respective team members) to 

submit a Design Concept in Stage 2 of the International Design 

Competition. 

The finalists selected were Michael Maltzan Architecture, 

Inc., Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) and West 8 Urban Design and 

Landscape Architecture. The design concept submission 

deadline occurred on November 29, 2011. The three groups 

were asked to consider the area over the water, the 21 acre 

Uplands directly west of the Pier and connections to the larger 

urban context. Stage 2 of the competition included a two (2) day 

briefing and ten (10) weeks to prepare a vision and concept for 

the project. http://www.stpete.org/pierdesign/stage_2.asp 

January 20, 2012 

The St. Petersburg Pier competition jury unanimously voted 

Michael Maltzan Architecture’s Lens design as the top concept. 

The ranking served as recommendation that the Lens design 

concept go before the St. Petersburg City Council for approval 

and authorization to proceed with negotiations with Michael 

Maltzan Architecture, Inc. for final design. 

February 2, 2012 

The St. Petersburg City Council approved the Lens design 

concept and authorized city staff to initiate Architectural/ 

Engineering Services contract negotiations with Michael Maltzan 

Architecture, Inc. 




BACKGROUND (continued) 

May 17, 2012 

The St. Petersburg City Council approved the Architectural/ 

Engineering Professional Services contract. The contract includes 

five (5) phases as follows: 

• Phase I -- Basis of Design 

• Phase II -- Schematic Design 

• Phase III -- Design Development 

• Phase IV -- Construction Documents 

• Phase V -- Construction Administration 

July 9 - 11, 2012 

BOD kickoff meetings between the City of St. Petersburg staff 

and the A/E team were held at the office of Michael Maltzan 

Architecture, Inc. in Los Angeles. 

September 13, 2012 

The A/E team presented BOD midterm updates to City Council 

in St. Petersburg. 

October 4, 2012 

The City retained the services of Skanska with City Council’s 

approval of the Construction Manager contract. 

December 4, 2012 

The A/E team will present the final BOD presentation to City 

Council in St. Petersburg. 

1 - 4 


PURPOSE OF REPORT 

The purpose of this BOD Report is as follows: 

• To provide a program narrative that identifies the 

concept’s key components. 

• To describe the design intent and establish design 

criteria. It is not intended to set definitive design 

decisions either architecturally or structurally. 

• To provide drawings sufficient for description of the 

scope and concept. 

• To provide documentation of the A/E team’s public 

outreach with the local community and marine science 

community. 

• To provide a cost model prepared by the Construction 

Manager with the A/E team. 

• To establish the technical criteria and benchmarks 

for building code, occupancy, egress, fire and safety 

compliance. 

• To provide estimated costs for the operation and 

maintenance of the project. 

• To identify future programmatic and planning 

opportunities for the Uplands area that are suggestions 

for inclusion in the City’s Downtown Waterfront Master 

Plan. 




DESCRIPTION OF 

WORK PERFORMED 

The goal of Phase I, BOD (BOD), is to develop a clearly defined, 

comprehensive set of basic design criteria that the A/E team 

will work from in the subsequent four (4) design phases. The A/E 

team has worked closely with the City appointed Construction 

Manager (CM) throughout BOD to ensure that the Lens concept 

complies with the City’s $40.5 million budget for the demolition 

of the existing Pier and construction of the new Pier. 

Michael Maltzan Architecture, Inc. and the members of the A/E 

team commenced work on the BOD Report in July 2012. Since 

then the team has accomplished a number of goals, namely the 

development and submission of the Environmental Resource 

Permits for the demolition of the existing Pier and construction 

of the new Pier, as well as assisting with the preparation of 

demolition bid documents. Additionally, the A/E team has held 

38 public outreach meetings to date, met with individuals from 

the marine science community and worked closely with City of 

St. Petersburg representatives to refine the design and identify 

project goals and technical criteria. Through collaboration with 

Skanska, a highly detailed cost model has been developed, 

allowing for accurate order of magnitude pricing and cost 

control from the outset of the project. 

The overall process of developing this document was highly 

collaborative and participatory, involving the efforts of all 

members of the team and key staff from the City of St. 

Petersburg. 

The BOD process provides for delivery of completed 

BOD documents by Monday, November 26, 2012, and the 

presentation of the BOD Report by Tuesday, December 4, 2012. 

Once the City has received and approved all of the deliverables, 

with any revisions, the City will authorize the A/E team, in writing, 

to commence with the Schematic Design phase. Any comments 

as part of the written authorization to proceed to the Schematic 

Design phase will become a part of the required services and 

deliverables to be provided by the A/E team in the Schematic 

Design phase. 

1 - 6 


ORGANIZATION OF REPORT 

The BOD Report is organized into seven (7) major sections 

followed by Appendices. 

1 Introduction 

Includes the background of the project, a definition of the 

purpose of the BOD Report, a description of the work performed 

and the organization of the report and project. 

2 Executive Summary 

Includes a comprehensive list of definitions of key words 

pertaining to the project and the BOD Report; the A/E team’s 

organizational chart; a quantitative summary of component 

space requirements; a summary of project costing and the 

project schedule. 

3 General Planning Criteria 

Includes broad conceptual statements related to the Pier as a 

whole and will influence the planning and design processes in 

the upcoming phases of the project. It is not intended to set 

definitive design decisions, but to establish the relationships 

between major parts. This section also establishes the technical 

criteria and benchmarks for building code, permitting, 

occupancy/egress, fire and safety compliance, and summarizes 

relevant design information based on the input of the public, the 

marine science community and the Pier Advisory Task Force. 

4 Component Planning Criteria 

Includes a description of eight (8) individual program 

components comprising the project. This section defines the 

activities and functions of each program component in addition 

to its users, character, physical space estimates and technical 

requirements. 

5 Basis of Design Concept Analysis 

Includes BOD architectural drawings and diagrams. 

6 Construction Manager at Risk: Project Implementation 

Includes project implementation information and a preliminary 

schedule. The detailed cost model developed by Construction 

Manager at Risk is included as Appendix M. 

7 Operating Expense and Maintenance Estimates 

Includes estimated operation and maintenance costs for the 

project. 




ORGANIZATION OF REPORT 

(continued) 

Appendices 

Provide supporting documentation to the sections described 

above, including: 

• Appendix A: St. Petersburg Pier Site Observations 

Report, June 27-28, 2012 (Buro Happold) 

• Appendix B: Conceptual Fire Safety Strategy 

Presentation, September 26, 2012 (Buro Happold) 

• Appendix C: Conceptual Fire Safety Strategy 

Presentation, Meeting Minutes (Buro Happold) 

• Appendix D: General Site Conditions Meeting Minutes, 

June 27, 2012 (McLaren Engineering Group) 

• Appendix E: Environmental Resource Permit Application, 

August 2012 

• Appendix F: Underwater Feature Outreach Project: 

Meeting Minutes from Technical Workshops and 

Interviews 

• Appendix G: Hydrodynamics and Flushing of the 

Proposed Docking Facilities at St. Petersburg Pier 

• Appendix H: Pier Advisory Task Force Report 

• Appendix I: Vision/Guiding Principles and Context for 

the Preparation of a Downtown Waterfront Master Plan, 

December 2011 

• Appendix J: Skanska - Key Personnel 

• Appendix K: ASCE 24-05: Flood Resistant Design and 

Construction 

• Appendix L: City Pier Building Foundation Evaluation, 

March 1, 2010 (Moffatt & Nichol) 

• Appendix M: Cost Model (Skanska) 

• Appendix N: Life Cycle Cost Analysis Report 

• Appendix O: St. Petersburg Pier Request for 

Qualifications - International Design Competition 

1 - 8 


2EXECUTIVE 

SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION 

This section includes a series of tables summarizing key project 

scope factors as well as general information concerning the new 

Pier, as follows: 

• Definitions 

Lexicon of key words used within the BOD Report. 

• Component Summary 

Space requirements for each program component. 

• Cost Summary 

Costs attributed to the new Pier in CSI format. 

• A/E Organizational Chart 

Organization of Architecture and Engineering team for 

the project. 

• Project Schedule 

Schedule and description of all phases and tasks of the 

project. 



2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

DEFINITIONS 

Architectural Phases 

Basis of Design (BOD): First phase of the design project. Living 

document developed by the Architecture and Engineering team 

that translates the City of St. Petersburg’s needs into building 

components and describes the technical approach and design 

parameters used for the project. 

Schematic Design (SD): Preparation of drawings and other 

documents illustrating the scale and relationship of project 

components. 

Design Development (DD): Development of plans and 

elevations for the project. Drawings establishing all major 

elements and outline specifications are prepared and a revised 

statement of construction cost is produced. 

Construction Documents (CD): Preparation of working drawings, 

specifications and bidding information. 

Construction Administration (CA): Construction of project as 

specified in the CD phase by the Construction Manager with 

assistance from the Architect. Additional clarifications to the 

drawings issued in the CD phase are made through the issuance 

of architectural sketches. 

A/E Team 

Architecture and Engineering team designing the new Pier. 

American Association of State Highway and Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO) 

A standards setting body which publishes specifications, test 

protocols and guidelines which are used in highway design and 

construction throughout the United States. The association 

represents not only highways but air, rail, water, and public 

transportation as well. 

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 

International standards organization that develops and publishes 

voluntary consensus technical standards for a wide range of 

materials, products, systems and services. 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 

Legislation enacted by the U.S. federal government in 1991 with 

the goal of removing barriers that limit the engagement of an 

individual with a disability in normal daily activity in the physical, 

public environment. 

Base Flood Elevation (BFE) 

Water surface elevation corresponding to a flood having a 

one percent probability of being equaled or exceeded in a 

given year as defined in the FEMA Flood Map. The base flood 

elevation for the site of the new Pier is +8 ft. NAVD 88. 

2 - 2 


Bent 

Part of a bridge substructure. A rigid frame commonly made of 

reinforced concrete or steel that supports a vertical load and is 

placed transverse to the length of a structure. 

Biome 

Large naturally occurring community of flora and fauna 

occupying a major habitat. 

Bulkhead 

Retaining wall along a waterfront. Synonymous with ‘seawall’. 

Canopy 

Rooflike projection or shelter. 

Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 

Short range plan which identifies capital projects and equipment 

purchases, provides a planning schedule and identifies options 

for financing the plan. 

Coastal High Hazard Zone 

Area particularly vulnerable to the effects of coastal flooding. 

Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) 

Area designated for redevelopment by a municipality or county 

after a determination that “slum and blight” criteria have been 

met, as established in Chapter 163 Part III of the Florida Statutes, 

traditionally funded by Tax Increment Financing (TIF). 

Component 

Discrete grouping of spaces and activities that are physically 

related, composing an area of the new Pier designed by Michael 

Maltzan Architecture, Inc. 

Construction Manager (CM) 

The construction team that will lead the construction efforts of 

the various subcontractors and hold the contract with the City of 

St. Petersburg to build the new Pier. The Construction Manager 

for the Pier is Skanska USA, Inc. 

Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) 

Delivey method that entails a commitment by the construction 

manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum 

Price (GMP). 

Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) 

An organization that maintains and advances the standardization 

of construction language as pertains to building specifications. 

CSI authored MasterFormat, which is an indexing system 

for organizing construction data, particularly construction 

specifications. 




DEFINITIONS (continued) 

Design Flood Elevation (DFE) 

Elevation of the 100-year storm as defined in FEMA Flood 

Insurance Studies or, in areas without FEMA floodplains, the 

elevation of the 25-year storm. 

Estuary 

Tidal mouth of a large river or body of water, where the tide 

meets the stream. 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 

Agency that coordinates the federal government’s role in 

preparing for, preventing, mitigating the effects of, and 

recovering from all domestic disasters, whether natural or manmade. 

Flood Hazard Area 

Areas that are subject to flooding. 

Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction (FACBC) 

State of Florida Legislation, adopted in 2012, that contains 

guidelines and provisions more stringent than the Federal 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 

Geotechnical Investigation 

Used to obtain information on the physical properties of soil 

and rock around a site to design earthworks and foundations for 

proposed structures and for repair of distress to earthworks and 

structures caused by subsurface conditions. 

Hub 

Program component of the new Pier located on the Uplands 

serving as the main retail and dining attraction for the project. 

HVAC 

Term used to refer to the mechanical systems which heat, 

cool, filter or dehumidify air in a room or building. Acronym for 

‘heating, ventilation and air conditioning’. 

Iconic Architecture 

Architecture that is beautiful in form, serves a useful purpose and 

creates a sense of place by contributing to the public realm while 

being unique, not ordinary and having never been done before. 

Intertidal Zone 

Area that is exposed to the air at low tide and underwater at 

high tide. 

Intermodal 

Accommodation of multiple means of transportation, including 

accessible, pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular. 

2 - 4 


Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) 

Suite of rating systems for the design, construction and 

operation of high performance green buildings, homes and 

neighborhoods. Developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, 

LEED is intended to provide building owners and operators a 

concise framework for identifying and implementing practical 

and measurable green building design, construction, operations 

and maintenance solutions. 

Lens 

Term referring to the iconic design of the new Pier by Michael 

Maltzan Architecture, Inc. 

Mean Sea Level (MSL) 

A tidal datum. The arithmetic mean of hourly heights observed 

over the National Tidal Datum Epoch. Shorter series are 

specified in the name; e.g., monthly mean sea level and yearly 

mean sea level. 

Millage Rate 

Amount per $1,000 that is used to calculate taxes on property. 

National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) 

Assocation of electrical equipment manufacturers for the 

development of technical standards that are in the best interests 

of the industry and users. 

National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29) 

A fixed reference adopted as a standard geodetic datum for 

elevations determined by leveling. The geodetic datum is fixed 

and does not take into account the changing stands of sea 

level. Because many variables affect sea level and because the 

geodetic datum represents a best fit over a broad area, the 

relationship between the geodetic datum and local mean sea 

level (MSL) is not consistent from one location in either time or 

space. NGVD (1929) has been superseded for use by the North 

American Vertical Datum of 1988. 

North American Vertical Datum (NAVD 88) 

A fixed reference for elevations determined by geodetic leveling. 

Established in 1991 by the minimum-constraint adjustment of 

the Canadian-Mexican-U.S. leveling observations, which held 

the fixed height of the primary tidal bench mark, referenced to 

the new International Great Lakes Datum of 1985 local mean sea 

level height value, at Father Point/Rimouski, Quebec, Canada. 

Piazza 

Public square or gathering place. 

Pier Approach 

Area of the existing Pier that describes the approximately 1/4 

mile long bridge portion of the Pier between the Uplands 

seawall and the Pier head. 




DEFINITIONS (continued) 

Pier Head 

Portion of the existing Pier that describes the large rectangular 

area at the eastern end of the 1926 Pier approach. 

Project 

Term used in the Basis of Design document to describe the 

new Pier designed by Michael Maltzan Architecture, Inc. in 

all of its scope, inclusive of all design components and site 

improvements. 

Promontory 

High ridge of land that juts out into a large body of water. 

Return Period 

Estimate of the interval of time between flood of a certain 

intensity or size. 

Reef 

A ridge of rock, coral, or sand just above or below the surface of 

a body of water. 

Risk Category 

Categorization of buildings and other structures for the 

determination of flood, wind, snow, ice and earthquake loads 

based on the risk associated with unacceptable performance. 

Scour 

The removal by hydrodynamic forces of bed material in the 

vicinity of coastal structures. 

Seagrass 

Underwater flowering plants that live in protected bays, lagoons 

and other shallow coastal waters. This grass-like vegetation 

forms small patchy beds that can develop into expansive 

meadows. Seagrasses perform a number of ecological functions 

such as improving water quality, contributing to the marine food 

web and stabilizing loose sediment. 

Seawall 

See Bulkhead. 

Shell Space 

Enclosed space with floors, windows, walls and roof that may 

include electrical or plumbing improvements but requires tenant 

improvements before it is ready to be occupied. 

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) 

Mechanism that allows local governments to use future 

projected taxes generated within an approved Community 

Redevelopment Area to finance public improvement projects. 

2 - 6 


Underwater Feature 

Future program component of the new Pier serving as an 

educational attraction that highlights the marine environment 

and marine restoration while contributing to the community. 

Uplands 

Landmass connecting the existing pier approach to the City 

and Bay Shore Drive NE. Extending 2nd Avenue NE into Tampa 

Bay, it is also the site of Spa Beach, the Pelican Parking Lot, the 

Dolphin Parking Lot and the St. Petersburg Museum of History. 

Wave Attenuator 

Man-made structure used to extract the energy from incoming 

waves. 




COMPONENT SUMMARY 

The basic elements of the project were generally depicted in the 

material submitted by the A/E team for the international design 

competition and shall be refined and further developed in 

accordance with the Agreement with the City of St. Petersburg. 

Program components for the new Pier include: 

• Welcome Mat - 47,400 SF 

Open civic space functioning as the site of public 

interface between the City and the Pier 

• Hub - 22,350 SF 

Planned retail and dining attractor for private sector 

development located on the Uplands near the Welcome 

Mat 

• Overwater Drive - 34,050 SF 

Looping bridge serving as a circuit from land to water 

and accommodating some vehicular traffic 

• Overwater Bridge - 20,100 SF 

Looping bridge serving as a circuit from land to water 

accommodating pedestrian traffic 

• Lens Canopy - 54,550 SF 

Visual focal point of the project that provides shade 

• Promontory - 18,000 SF 

Platform beneath Lens Canopy for public gathering and 

direct access to water 

• Marina - 9,150 SF 

Central space within the Lens that accommodates 

aquatic vehicles and other visitor attractions 

• Underwater Feature (future component) - 20,000 SF 

Public attraction that highlights the relationship of the 

people of St. Petersburg’s to the Bay and its ecology 

2 - 8 


LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 2.1 Program Components of the new Pier 




COST SUMMARY 

Project Budget 

The total project budget for the new St. Petersburg Pier is 

fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) as set forth in the City of St. 

Petersburg’s Intown Redevelopment Plan and subsequent 

amendments. The project budget is comprised of several 

categories of expenditures required to design, administer and 

construct the new St. Petersburg Pier. The breakdown of the 

total project budget is as follows: 

Project Hard Cost 

Demolition Budget $ 3,075,000 

Construction Cost Budget $ 36,950,000 

Geotechnical Testing $ 500,000 

Project Hard Cost Subtotal $ 40,525,000 

Project Soft Cost 

Design and Predevelopment Budget $ 6,595,000 

Administration, Inspection & Contingency $ 2,880,000 

Project Soft Cost Subtotal $ 9,475,000 

Total Project Budget $ 50,000,000 

Construction Cost Budget 

The construction cost budget is defined as the total budget 

available to the Construction Manager to construct the new St. 

Petersburg Pier pursuant to the Guaranteed Maximum Price 

Construction Manager at Risk Contract. The construction cost 

budget does not include the demolition cost, or any of the 

soft cost required to design and administer the project. The 

construction cost budget is $36,950,000. 

Project Cost Plan 

The development of a project cost plan was a key requirement 

of the BOD phase. The purpose of the cost plan is to ensure 

that the new Pier concept can be constructed by a Construction 

Manager within the construction cost budget. The project cost 

plan is determined by the cost of the work plus the general 

conditions, the CM fee, bonds, insurance, permitting cost and 

contingencies required to construct the new Pier. 

2 - 10 


Cost Summary (CSI Format) 

The basic elements of the project that constitute the Cost of the 

Work are as follows: 

1 General Requirements $ 315,000 

2 Existing Conditions $ 263,052 

3 Concrete $ 6,545,439 

4 Masonry $ 77,599 

5 Metals $ 6,377,977 

6 Wood, Plastics and Composites $ 124,378 

7 Thermal and Moisture Protection $ 5,063,791 

8 Openings $ 86,652 

9 Finishes $ 36,224 

10 Specialties $ 55,309 

11 Furnishings $ 170,152 

12 Special Construction $ 1,395,775 

13 Conveying Equipment $ 133,571 

14 Fire Suppression $ 5,672 

15 Plumbing $ 141,449 

16 Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning $ 18,151 

17 Electrical $ 2,357,373 

18 Communications $ 269,207 

19 Earthwork $ 79,000 

20 Exterior Improvements $ 4,633,855 

21 Utilities $ 751,695 

Subtotal $ 30,820,502 

22 General Conditions, CM Fee, Construction 

Bonds, Insurance, Permitting Cost, 

Contingencies $ 6,129,498 

Construction Cost Budget $ 36,950,000 




A/E TEAM 

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART 

CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG 

SKANSKA USA BUILDING, INC. 

CONSTRUCTION MANAGER / TAMPA, FL 

CHUCK JABLON 

OPERATIONS VICE PRESIDENT 

BRIAN COAKLEY 

VICE PRESIDENT OF PRECONSTRUCTION 

ST. PETERSBURG, FL 

PETE KARAMITSANIS 

PROJECT ADVISOR / TAMPA, FL 

MOFFAT & NICHOL ENGINEERS 

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING / TAMPA, FL 

MICHAEL HERRMAN 

WILLIS CONSTRUCTION 

OPERATING EXPENSE ANALYSIS / MAITLAND, FL 

MICHAEL MALTZAN ARCHITECTURE, INC. 

ARCHITECT OF RECORD / LOS ANGELES, CA 

MICHAEL MALTZAN, FAIA 

DESIGN PRINCIPAL 

TIM WILLIAMS 

PROJECT DIRECTOR 

WIL CARSON, LEED AP 

PROJECT DESIGNER 

ANDREW SMITH RASMUSSEN 

JOB CAPTAIN 

LISA MADONNA 

PROJECT COORDINATO R 

BURO HAPPOLD 

SMEP, CIVIL, CODE CONSULTING / 

FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY ENGINEER 

NEW YORK, NY / LOS ANGELES, CA 

CRAIG SCHWITTER 

PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE 

NEIL PORTO 

PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE 

JP CHAKAR 

ASSOCIATE PRINCIPAL 

CARL KEOGH 

ASSOCIATE 

MCLAREN ENGINEERING GROUP 

MARINE STRUCTURAL / ORLANDO, FL 

WANNEMACHER JENSEN ARCHITECTS, INC. 

ASSOCIATE ARCHITECT / ST. PETERSBURG, FL 

LISA WANNEMACHER 

PRINCIPAL 

JASON JENSEN 

PROJECT DIRECTOR 

TOM LEADER STUDIO 

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT / BERKELY, CA 

TOM LEADER 

PRINCIPAL 

KATHRYN DRINKHOUSE 

ASSOCIATE / TECHNICAL DIRECTOR 

APPLIED TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT 

MARINA / GAINESVILLE, FL 

ROBERT SEMMES 

PRINCIPAL 

JANICKI ENVIRONMENTAL 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING / ST. PETERSBURG, FL 

TONY JANICKI 

PRESIDENT 

MIKE WESSEL 

VICE PRESIDENT 

L’OBSERVATOIRE 

LIGHTING DESIGNER / NEW YORK, NY 

HERVE DESCOTTES 

PRINCIPAL 

B. ALEX MILLER 

PROJECT MANAGER 

2 - 12 


PROJECT SCHEDULE 

Activity Activity 


2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 

ID ID 

Description Description Dur DurStart Start Finish Finish 

M J JMA JS JO AN SD OJ NF DM JA FM MJ AJ MA JS JO AN SD OJNF DM JA FM MJ AJ MA JSJOA NSD OJ NF DM JA FM MJ AJ MA JSOC 

J A SOC 

Basis Basis of Design of Design Phase Phase 

BD-0010 BD-0010 Public Outreach Public Outreach & Input& Input 42 01JUN12* 42 01JUN12* 31JUL12 31JUL12 Public Outreach Public Outreach & Input& Input 

BD-0020 BD-0020 Programming Programming 34 02JUL12* 34 02JUL12* 17AUG12 17AUG12 Programming Programming 

BD-1010 BD-1010 Presentations Presentations by Shortlisted by Shortlisted CMs CMs 1 17JUL12* 1 17JUL12* 17JUL12 17JUL12 Presentations Presentations by Shortlisted by Shortlisted CMs CMs 

BD-1011 BD-1011 Award Project Award Project 1 18JUL12 1 18JUL12 18JUL12 18JUL12 Award Award Project Project 

BD-0060 BD-0060 Basis of Basis Design of Design Rpt - to Rpt Include - to Include Final Cost Final Plan Cost Plan 97 19JUL12 97 19JUL1204DEC12 

04DEC12 

Basis of Basis Design of Design Rpt - to Rpt Include - to Include Final Cost Final Plan Cost Plan 

Schematic Schematic Design Design Phase Phase 

SD-0020 SD-0020 Constructability Constructability & Cost & Plan Cost Review Plan Review 55 05DEC12 55 05DEC121FEB13 

21FEB13 

Constructability Constructability & Cost & Plan Cost Review Plan Review 

SD-0010 SD-0010 50% Schematic 50% Schematic Design Design Submission Submission 55 05DEC12 55 05DEC121FEB13 

21FEB13 

SD-0030 SD-0030 Schematic Schematic Design Design Phase Estimate Phase Estimate & Cost & Review Cost Review 20 22FEB13 20 22FEB1321MAR13 

21MAR13 

SD-0040 SD-0040 100% Schematic 100% Schematic Design Design 57 23JAN13 57 23JAN1311APR13 

11APR13 

SD-0050 SD-0050 Submittal SD Submittal Including Including Final SD Final Estimate SD Estimate 0 0 11APR13 11APR13 

Design Design Development Phase Phase 

DD-0020 DD-0020 Constructability Constructability Review Review 21 12APR13 21 12APR13 10MAY13 10MAY13 

DD-0010 DD-0010 50% Design 50% Design Development Development Submission Submission 30 12APR13 30 12APR13 23MAY13 23MAY13 

DD-0030 DD-0030 Design Design Development Development Phase Estimate Phase Estimate & Cost & Update Cost Update 20 03MAY13 20 03MAY13 31MAY13 31MAY13 

DD-0040 DD-0040 100% Design 100% Design Development Development Submission Submission 28 24MAY13 28 24MAY13 03JUL13 03JUL13 

DD-0050 DD-0050 Submittal DD Submittal Including Including Final DD Final Estimate DD Estimate 0 0 03JUL13 03JUL13 

Geotechnical / Wind / Wind / Wave / Wave Studies Studies 

SD-0015 SD-0015 Bid/Award Bid/Award Geotech Geotech Survey/Fndn Survey/Fndn Borings Borings (Skanska) (Skanska) 22 05DEC12 22 05DEC12 07JAN13 07JAN13 

SD-0065 SD-0065 Wind Studies Wind Studies (Arch/Engr) (Arch/Engr) 132 05DEC12 132 05DEC12 11JUN13 11JUN13 

SD-0070 SD-0070 Wave Studies Wave Studies (Arch/Engr) (Arch/Engr) 132 05DEC12 132 05DEC12 11JUN13 11JUN13 

SD-0025 SD-0025 Geotech Geotech Survey Survey & Fndn & Borings Fndn Borings (Skanska) (Skanska) 88 08JAN13 88 08JAN1309MAY13 

09MAY13 

SD-0035 SD-0035 Issue Geotech Issue Geotech Survey/Fndn Survey/Fndn Borings Borings Rpt (Skanska) Rpt (Skanska) 22 10MAY13 22 10MAY13 11JUN13 11JUN13 

Construction Document Document Phase Phase 

CD-0020 CD-0020 Constructability Constructability Review Review 21 05JUL13 21 05JUL1302AUG13 

02AUG13 

CD-0010 CD-0010 50% Construction 50% Construction Document Document Submission Submission 46 05JUL13 46 05JUL1309SEP13 

09SEP13 

CD-0030 CD-0030 50% CD 50% Phase CD - Phase Initial - GMP Initial Submission GMP Submission 12 22AUG13 12 22AUG13 09SEP13 09SEP13 

CD-0040 CD-0040 100% Construction 100% Construction Document Document Submission Submission 53 10SEP13 53 10SEP13 21NOV13 21NOV13 

CD-0050 CD-0050 Final GMP Final GMP 32 01NOV13 32 01NOV13 17DEC13 17DEC13 

CD-0051 CD-0051 Award Contracts Award Contracts / Buyout / Buyout 22 18DEC13 22 18DEC13 20JAN14 20JAN14 

Permitting Permitting 

50% Schematic 50% Schematic Design Design Submission Submission 

Schematic Schematic Design Design Phase Estimate Phase Estimate & Cost & Review Cost Review 

100% Schematic 100% Schematic Design Design 

SD Submittal SD Submittal Including Including Final SD Final Estimate SD Estimate 

Constructability Constructability Review Review 

50% Design 50% Design Development Development Submission Submission 

Design Design Development Development Phase Estimate Phase Estimate & Cost & Update Cost Update 


DD Submittal DD Submittal Including Including Final DD Final Estimate DD Estimate 

Bid/Award Bid/Award Geotech Geotech Survey/Fndn Survey/Fndn Borings Borings (Skanska) (Skanska) 

Wind Studies Wind Studies (Arch/Engr) (Arch/Engr) 

Wave Studies Wave Studies (Arch/Engr) (Arch/Engr) 

Geotech Geotech Survey Survey & Fndn & Borings Fndn Borings (Skanska) (Skanska) 

Issue Geotech Issue Geotech Survey/Fndn Survey/Fndn Borings Borings Rpt (Skanska) Rpt (Skanska) 


50% Construction 50% Construction Document Document Submission Submission 

50% CD 50% Phase CD - Phase Initial - GMP Initial Submission GMP Submission 


Final GMP Final GMP 

Award Award Contracts Contracts / Buyout / Buyout 

SD-0055 Activity SD-0055 Activity SWFWMD SWFWMD Permitting Permitting Activity Activity 

261* 01NOV12* 261* 01NOV12* 08NOV13 08NOV13 

SWFWMD SWFWMD Permitting Permitting 

SD-0045 SD-0045 US Army US Corps Army of Corps Engineer of Engineer Permitting Permitting 289 21JAN13* 289 21JAN13* 07MAR14 07MAR14 

2012 2012 2013 2013 US Army 2014 US Corps Army 2014 of Corps Engineer of Engineer Permitting 2015 Permitting 2015 

ID ID 



J A SOC 

SD-0060 SD-0060 Coast Guard Coast Permitting Guard Permitting 289 21JAN13* 289 21JAN13* 07MAR14 07MAR14 

Coast Guard Coast Permitting Guard Permitting 

Start DateStart Date 

01MAY12 01MAY12 STP3 STP3 

Sheet 1 of Sheet 2 1 of 2 

Finish Demolition Date Finish Demolition Date Phase Phase 

17AUG15 17AUG15 

Data DateData Date 

01MAY12 01MAY12 

SKANSKA SKANSKA USA Building, USA Building, Inc. Inc. 

DE-0010 DE-0010 Close Existing Close Existing Pier Pier 22 01MAY13* 22 01MAY13* 31MAY13 31MAY13 

Close Existing Close Existing Pier Pier 

Run DateRun Date 19NOV12 19NOV12 11:40 11:40 

Basis Basis of Design of Design 

DE-0011 DE-0011 Demo Inverted Demo Inverted Pyramid Pyramid (Above (Above Water) Water) 27 03AUG13 27 03AUG13 30AUG13 30AUG13 

Demo Inverted Demo Inverted Pyramid Pyramid (Above (Above Water) Water) 

St. Petersburg St. Petersburg Municipal Municipal Pier Replacement Pier Project Project 

DE-0012 DE-0012 Demo Existing Demo Existing Pier (Below Pier (Below Water) Water) 63 03SEP13 63 03SEP13 29NOV13 29NOV13 

Demo Existing Demo Existing Pier (Below Pier (Below Water) Water) 

Design Design & Construction & Schedule Schedule 

Construction © Phase Primavera © Phase Primavera Systems, Systems, Inc. Inc. 

CO-0010 CO-0010 Execute Execute GMP GMP 0 21JAN14 0 21JAN14 

Execute Execute GMP GMP 

CO-0022 CO-0022 Setup Survey Setup Survey Control Control Piers Piers 10 21JAN14 10 21JAN1403FEB14 

03FEB14 

Setup Survey Setup Survey Control Control Piers Piers 

CO-0021 CO-0021 Mobilize Mobilize & Setup & Environmental Setup Environmental Controls Controls 20 21JAN14 20 21JAN1417FEB14 

17FEB14 

Mobilize Mobilize & Setup & Environmental Setup Environmental Controls Controls 

CO-0023 CO-0023 Test Piles Test / Load Piles Test / Load Test 10 04FEB14 10 04FEB1417FEB14 

17FEB14 

Test Piles Test / Load Piles Test / Load Test 

CO-0024 CO-0024 Install Pier Install / Marina Pier / Marina Fndns & Fndns Bridge & Platform Bridge Platform 132 18FEB14 132 18FEB1422AUG14 

22AUG14 Install Pier Install / Marina Pier / Marina Fndns & Fndns Bridge & Bridge Platform Platform 

CO-0026 CO-0026 Install Elevated Install Elevated Pathway Pathway / Crown / / Crown Pier Fndns / Pier Fndns 132 18FEB14 132 18FEB1422AUG14 

22AUG14 Install Elevated Install Elevated Pathway Pathway / Crown / Crown / Pier Fndns / Pier Fndns 

CO-0031 CO-0031 Offsite Offsite Prefab Prefab Crown Architectural Crown Architectural Elements Elements 120 09JUN14 120 09JUN1425NOV14 

25NOV14 

Offsite Offsite Prefab Prefab Crown Crown Architectural Architectural Elements Elements 

CO-0025 CO-0025 Install Lower Install Pathways Lower Pathways 110 23JUN14 110 23JUN1425NOV14 

25NOV14 

Install Lower Install Pathways Lower Pathways 

CO-0027 CO-0027 Install Bridge/Elevated Install Bridge/Elevated Pathway Pathway & Arch & Elements Arch Elements 110 23JUN14 110 23JUN1425NOV14 

25NOV14 

Install Bridge/Elevated Install Bridge/Elevated Pathway Pathway & Arch & Elements Arch Elements 

CO-0028 CO-0028 Construct Construct Observation Observation Areas Areas 66 25SEP14 66 25SEP14 29DEC14 29DEC14 

Construct Construct Observation Observation Areas Areas 

CO-0029 CO-0029 Construct Construct Marina Marina Sections Sections 88 26NOV14 88 26NOV14 01APR15 01APR15 

Construct Construct Marina Marina Sections Sections 

CO-0030 CO-0030 Erect Crown Erect Crown 144 26NOV14 144 26NOV14 19JUN15 19JUN15 

Erect Crown Erect Crown 

CO-0032 CO-0032 Substantial Substantial Completion Completion 0 0 19JUN15 19JUN15 

Substantial Substantial Completion Completion 

CO-0034 CO-0034 Final Completion Final Completion 20 22JUN15 20 22JUN1520JUL15 

20JUL15 

Final Completion Final Completion 

CO-0040 CO-0040 Close Out Close - Grand Out - Opening Grand Opening 20 21JUL15 20 21JUL1517AUG15 

17AUG15 

Close Out Close - Grand Out - Opening Grand Opening 

Figure 2.2 Current Project Schedule Agreed Upon by the A/E Team and the Construction Manager as of 11/19/2012 

MICHAEL MALTZAN ARCHITECTURE, INC. 2 - 13 



Finish Date Finish Date 

17AUG15 17AUG15 


01MAY12 01MAY12 





St. Petersburg St. Petersburg Municipal Municipal Pier Replacement Pier Project Project

3GENERAL 

PLANNING 

CRITERIA

INTRODUCTION 

This section is intended to function as a guide for the design 

team to develop all subsequent stages of work. The criteria are 

not intended as specific solutions, but rather to establish the 

functional, operational and contextual principles that should 

influence the design process of the project. They are concerned 

with both general qualities and specific requirements: 

• Public Outreach Notes 

Summary 

Frequently Asked Questions 

• Underwater Feature Outreach Summary 

• Uplands Usage Suggestions 

• Pier Advisory Task Force Report Summary 

• Site and Urban Design Criteria 

Site Location and Orientation 

Existing Site Use 

Existing Pier Head and Pier Approach 

Existing Uplands Area 

Existing Building Use 

Historic Buildings and Monuments 

Adjacent Land Uses 

Photographic Documentation of Site Context 

Zoning Guidelines 

Environmental Considerations 

Existing Structures to be Retained or Demolished 

Parking Requirements 

Building Visibility 

General Security Requirements 

Site Access 

Site Accessibility 

Economic Development Opportunities 

Water Levels 

Sea Level Rise 

Floodplain Management 

Wind Data 

Geography and Climate Data 

• Existing Infrastructure 

Existing Pier 

Existing Bulkhead 

Existing Water Service 

Existing Drainage 

Existing Natural Gas 

Existing Lighting and Electrical Service 

Existing Underwater Conditions 



3 GENERAL PLANNING CRITERIA 

INTRODUCTION (continued) 

• Architectural Criteria 

Key Concepts 

Sustainable Planning and Design 

Building Massing 

Albert Whitted Airport Flight Path Study 

Shading Study 

Materials and Finishes 

Canopy Materials 

Ipe Specification Data 

Pier Access 

Pier Trolley Implementation 

Parking Facilities 

Signage and Wayfinding 

Public Amenities 

Revenue Generating Amenities 

Lighting Systems 


• Engineering Criteria 

General Technical Requirements 

Marine Engineering Criteria 

Foundation Selection and Design 

Wind and Wave Load Criteria 

Storm Load Criteria 

Structural Criteria 

Dimension and Loadings 

Clearances 


Site Work Criteria 

Mechanical Criteria 

Potable Water 

Storm Drainage 

Sanitary Sewer 

Natural Gas 

Electrical Criteria 

• Marina Criteria 

General Marina Criteria 

Clearances 

Phasing 

Floating Dock System 

• Underwater Feature Criteria 

Introduction 

Project Goals 

Communities and Needs 

Constraints 

Approaches and Possible Components 

Artificial Reefs 

Programs 

Appearance, Structure, Materials and Research 

3 - 2 


• Fire and Life Safety Requirements 

Applicable Codes 

Occupancy Classification 

Occupant Load 

Performance Based Egress Design approach 

Fire Department Access and Facilities 

Fire Protection Systems 

• Accessibility and Code Requirements 

Accessibility Requirements 

Occupancy 

Applicable Codes and Standards 

Risk Category Descriptions 

Risk Category Requirements 

Risk Category Recommendation 

Risk Category Design Implications 

• Permitting and Demolition 

New St. Petersburg Pier Permitting 

Pier Demolition 

Albert Whitted Shoreline Stabilization 

Water Quality Monitoring 

Pier Structure Environmental Considerations 

Marina Environmental Considerations 

Underwater Reef Environmental Considerations 

Construction Methodologies 




PUBLIC OUTREACH NOTES 

Summary 

Beginning in June 2012, the design team embarked on a 

substantial public outreach campaign to educate the community 

about the Lens. Led by Lisa Wannemacher of Wannemacher 

Jensen Architects, a total of 38 presentations were made to local 

Rotary Groups, Exchange Clubs, Neighborhood Associations, 

university students and public and private organizations 

between April and November of 2012. Several others will be 

held in the near future. Following the presentations, a question 

and answer period provided an opportunity for the public to 

obtain additional insight and offer their personal ideas and 

aspirations. The attendees left the presentations with a greater 

understanding of the project and the overwhelming majority 

became strong supporters of the process and the design. A few 

noteworthy comments follow: 

“I had several members approach me afterwards to 

express how much more clearly they understood the 

project, and felt more comfortable with the plan and 

design. I believe that the evening was a success.” 

Andrew Lee – President, MLK Business District 

“I know the vast majority of the audience was favorably 

impressed, if not inspired. You set the stage nicely, and 

then made a great case for the direction we are headed in 

on this long range project.” 

Peter Motzenbecker – Vinoy Business Alliance 

“I believe I detected a growing enthusiasm for the project 

within our membership.” 

Jim Schattman – President, Crossroads Area Neighborhood 

Association 

“Lisa, you changed a lot of people’s minds.” 

David Hoover – President, Riviera Bay Civic Association 

“I feel several ‘undecideds’ left with a much better 

understanding of what the Lens is about!” 

Hal Freedman – Downtown Resident 

Additionally, artists, commercial business owners and athletic 

event directors, among others, were contacted to solicit their 

input for the final BOD Report. Presentations and public 

outreach will continue throughout future phases of the project so 

that the new Pier design will ultimately become a true reflection 

of the communities’ ambitions, goals and desires. 

Several design refinements have already occurred as a result 

of comments from the community and individual citizens. 

Important changes include: elimination of motorboats from the 

Marina to provide a space that favors passive, people-powered 

watercraft; relocation of the Learning Steps Amphitheater to the 

Promontory; provision of designated fishing platforms; reduction 

in overall length of the Lens; incorporation of a civic water 

feature at the Uplands; increase in the widths of the Overwater 

3 - 4 


Bridge and Overwater Drive; relocation of Hub to South Uplands; 

introduction of a waterside restaurant at the Hub; and expansion 

of the concessions shop at the Promontory to also serve as an 

open-air “drinking and dining garden.” 

A complete list of presentations is included in the table Figure 

3.1. A list of Frequently Asked Questions is also provided in this 

section of the BOD Report. 





(continued) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

Organization / Community Member Date Persons 

Real Estate Investment Council of Tampa Bay 

City Pier Forum 




Chamber of Commerce 

CONA - Council of Neighborhood Associations 

Pinellas County Economic Development Council 

City Council Meeting 

Tampa Bay Times Editorial Board 

Ocean Team/Marine Science Community 

City Planning and Development Services Department 

St. Petersburg Sunrise Rotary 

Leadership St. Pete Alumni Association 

Old Northeast Exchange Club 

MLK Business District Association 

Chamber/Marine Science/Task Force 

Crossroads Area Neighborhood Association 

Vinoy Business Alliance 

St. Pete Arts Executives 

Broadwater Civic Association 

Marina Advisory Group 

St. Pete Committee to Advocate for Persons with Impairment (CAPI) 

Chamber of Commerce 

Exchange Club of St. Petersburg 

St. Pete Parks and Recreation Department 

Riviera Bay Civic Association 

Urban Land Institute Tampa Bay 

Agency on Bay Management 

Downtown Neighborhood Association 

St. Pete Management Team 

University of South Florida Introduction to Architecture Class - all majors represented 

St. Pete Mayor’s Youth Congress & TASCO Staff 

St. Pete College Building Construction Students & Architecture Students 

WOW St. Petersburg 

District 5 - Multiple Neighborhood Associations 

District 4 - Multiple Neighborhood Associations 

Boca Ciega High School - Students and Faculty 

April 18 

June 7 

June 12 

June 14 

June 19 

July 17 

July 18 

July 19 

July 19 

July 20 

July 26 

July 27 

July 31 

Aug 3 

Aug 7 

Aug 7 

Aug 14 

Aug 14 

Aug 15 

Aug 22 

Sept 6 

Sept 11 

Sept 12 

Sept 14 

Sept 20 

Sept 21 

Sept 27 

Sept 28 

Oct 11 

Oct 11 

Oct 17 

Oct 18 

Oct 24 

Oct 30 

Nov 2 

Nov 7 

Nov 14 

Nov 15 

140 

120 

25 

49 

76 

70 

35 

35 

40+ 

8 

20 

9 

35 

40 

40 

40 

8 

45 

65 

35 

35 

11 

12 

75 

12 

7 

12 

15 

30 

60 

95 

191 

38 

45 

125 

25 

4 

68 

Figure 3.1 Public Presentations and Information Sessions 

3 - 6 


Frequently Asked Questions 

1 What is there to do at the New 

Pier? Why would I go out there? 

A/E Team Response 

Eat, drink, walk, kayak, relax, create moments that will last forever 

while enjoying the views and the best St. Petersburg has to offer 

over the Bay. The opportunities for the new Pier are endless; it 

will be a unique destination to be active or relax, get married or 

fish with the kids. More specifically, you can: 

• buy a coffee, a cold soda, a hamburger, french fries or a beer 

• watch live entertainment and dance 

• rent a kayak, canoe or pedal boat at the Marina 

• ride an elevator to elevated viewing platforms and balconies 

and watch the sunrise over Tampa Bay or the sunset over 

downtown 

• buy bait, fish at the Promontory or the north-east side of the 

Marina, and feed the pelicans 

• dine at a water’s edge restaurant 

• rent a pedicycle or ride a bike 

• experience a variety of educational opportunities at the 

Promontory and the Learning Steps 

• watch an underwater light show in the center of the Lens 

• use the 18,000 sq. ft. of shaded gathering space for a party 

or community event. 

• surf the internet via WiFi 

• purchase a souvenir 

• rest in the shade on public benches, tables and chairs 

• use a public toilet at the Hub, the Marina or the Promontory 

• park your car at the Pelican or Dolphin Lot and catch a trolley 

out to the end of the Pier 

• experience 360° views from all areas on the Pier 

• enjoy extensive shaded walkways 

• drink from public water fountains 

2 Will there be an admission charge? 

No. 

3 Where can I buy something to eat 

or drink? 

The Pier will provide leasing opportunities for concessions and 

restaurants at the Hub, Marina and Promontory. 





(continued) 

4 Where will I park? 

You can park in one of the 157 spaces at the existing Pelican 

Lot or at one of the 312 spaces at the existing Dolphin Lot. 

Valet parking may also be provided by the operator of the Hub 

restaurant. 

5 Is public transportation available 

from the parking areas to the 

Pier? 

Yes. A public trolley accommodating wheelchairs will take visitors 

from the Welcome Mat/Hub and Spa Beach near the Pelican Lot 

out to the Promontory. There will be stops at the Dolphin and 

Pelican Lots, the Welcome Mat, the Marina, the Promontory and 

connections to Beach Drive and The Shops at St. Pete. 

6 How long will it take me to walk 

to the end of the new Pier? 

Walking at a comfortable pace of 2 mph or 30 minutes per mile, 

it will take approximately 7 minutes to walk from the landside 

Hub to the Promontory. 

7 Will the new Pier be ADA 

accessible? 

Yes. The new Pier will provide universal access. Accessible ramps 

will be utilized in several areas and an elevator will take visitors 

up to elevated viewing platforms. 

8 Can people use bicycles or 

skateboards on the Pier? Are there 

any types of transportation that 

the Pier will not accommodate? 

The new Pier will accommodate walkers and runners as well as 

bicyclists, rollerbladers, Segways, children’s strollers, wheelchairs 

and low speed mobility scooters. The new Pier will not 

accommodate private vehicles, motorcycles or motorscooters (a 

Vespa for example). The accommodation of skateboards is still 

to be determined. 

9 Will there be opportunities to 

rent kayaks, canoes, stand-up 

paddleboards, or pedal boats? 

10 Will there be a fueling pump for 

boats at the Marina? 

11 Will WiFi be provided at the Pier? 

Yes. The City will provide a venue for watercraft rental companies 

to locate their businesses at the Pier’s Marina. 

No. Motorized vessels will not be allowed in the Marina. 

Yes. 

12 Can I take my dog to the new Pier? 

Yes. 

13 Will my taxes be raised to pay for 

the Pier project? 

No. Neither the taxes of downtown property owners, nor the 

taxes of other property owners in St. Petersburg will be raised. 

3 - 8 


14 What is the total cost of the 

project and what does it include? 

The total cost of the project is $50 million. This includes the 

demolition of the existing Pier, the construction of the new Pier 

and all “soft” costs like professional services fees, geotechnical 

testing and contingencies. Approximately $36.9 million of 

the $50 million is set aside for the construction contract with 

the Construction Manager. The $36.9 million will pay for all of 

the overwater elements, including the Overwater Bridge, the 

Overwater Drive, the Marina, the Canopy, the Promontory, and 

the Hub and the Welcome Mat on the Uplands. 

15 Who is paying for the new St. 

Pete Pier? 

See pages 3-45 and 3-46 of this report for a detailed 

explanation of the Tax Increment Financing Plan and the Intown 

Redevelopment District. 

16 Is the $50 million just a 

downpayment on a $150 million 

project? 

No. Program elements that cost more than the current total cost 

of $50 million are not part of the project and are not required to 

make the project successful. The results of the City’s Downtown 

Waterfront Master Plan, scheduled to be adopted in 2015, will 

guide all downtown waterfront development beyond the $50 

million allocated to the Pier project. 

17 Will the new Pier be complete 

and ready for full use by the 

public with the $50 million 

budget? 

Yes. The new Pier will be complete, fully functional and 

integrated into the Uplands via the Overwater Drive. The 

restaurant at the Hub will require private sector investment and 

the City will solicit proposals through an RFP process in the first 

quarter of 2013. It is intended that a full service restaurant at the 

Hub will be completed concurrent with the opening of the new 

Pier. 

18 How much money is currently in 

the Intown TIF District pot? 

As of September 30, 2012 (the end of the City’s Fiscal Year) 

there was approximately $1.4 million in the Intown District’s fund 

balance. These monies, along with future years earnings, will be 

used to pay for the approved Intown District projects. 

19 Why not wait until all of the $50 

million is in the TIF pot before we 

move forward with the project? 

After taking care of the existing debt obligations that are being 

paid for using TIF revenues, it would take approximately 10 years 

to accumulate sufficient TIF funds to pay for the Pier project. 

The existing Pier will close on May 31, 2013. During the ten (10) 

additional years, while the City waits for the funds to accumulate, 

the Pier will remain closed and construction costs will escalate. 





(continued) 

20 Why should we spend $50 million 

in these tough budget times? 

The Pier in its many incarnations has been a landmark for the 

City of St. Petersburg. While the Pier building has been replaced 

every 40 years, the original structure dates back to 1926. The 

City and County jointly established a funding source specifically 

for its replacement, and the construction of the new Pier at the 

present moment is necessary to continue this legacy. Through 

the lengthy public visioning process and the many meetings of 

the Pier Advisory Task Force, it became abundantly clear that the 

citizens of St. Petersburg want a pier. 

21 If the City doesn’t expend the 

entire $50 million on the Pier 

renovation project, what will 

happen to the remaining funds? 

Under the current Redevelopment Plan, any unspent monies 

would remain in the Intown District Trust Fund until the 

expiration of the District (currently planned for 2035). Thereafter, 

these funds would be returned to each government in the same 

percentage as the original contributions (roughly 55% City 

and 45% County). The City and County have jointly agreed to 

fund up to $50 million of project costs for the Pier renovation. 

If all of these funds are not needed to support this project, the 

unspent revenues would be treated as described above; or, the 

City and County could add projects to the approved list; or, 

they can agree to rebate a portion of the unspent funds back 

to the respective contributing government prior to the planned 

expiration of the District. Any of these actions would require 

formally amending the Intown Redevelopment Plan and the 

related City/County Interlocal Agreement. 

22 Why doesn’t the City build a new 

police station with the money 

instead? 

The police station does not fall within the Intown Tax District so 

the money generated by downtown property owners cannot 

be used to build a new police station. Businesses and residents 

of the Downtown Tax Increment Financing District have had a 

portion of their taxes applied to the Pier project and are entitled 

to have those funds committed back into their district, as agreed 

between the City and County per the Intown Redevelopment 

Agreement. 

23 What happens if the design 

exceeds the budget? 

The agreement with the design team and the Construction 

Manager includes several provisions that deal with cost 

protection. The design team is tasked with developing a design 

that must be built within a fixed construction budget. The 

Construction Manager is currently working with the A/E team to 

help ensure that the project stays within the budget throughout 

the design and into the construction phase and will continue 

to do so in the future. If at any time the design exceeds the 

construction cost budget, the design must be revised to bring 

the project back within budget at no cost to the City. 

3 - 10 


24 What is the actual operating 

cost/subsidy of the existing Pier? 

The total annual cost to maintain and operate the existing Pier 

was $2.4 million in 2011, with a subsidy of $1.35 million, paid 

for by the taxpayers in St. Petersburg. The ten year average 

expenses were $2.8 million, with a ten year average subsidy of 

$1.4 million. 

25 What is the anticipated operating 

cost/subsidy of the Lens? 

Less than the current Pier. The City has prepared a cost plan that 

outlines a proforma for operation. Please see Section 7 of this 

BOD Report for additional information. 

26 Will the project create new jobs 

for St. Pete and Pinellas County 

residents? 

The Lens will create local construction jobs. Additional jobs will 

be created for people at the waterside restaurant and other 

concession, rental and retail spaces. 

27 We already have lots of walkways 

and pedestrian trails - why do we 

need another? 

The Pier’s pathways are an extension of the downtown waterfront 

and allow the community and tourists to experience the water 

without needing to be in a boat, an amenity that not all people 

have access to. The location over the water also provides 

spectacular views back to the City. 

28 Will there be benches to sit on 

and shaded areas for resting? 

Yes. Multiple spaces will be provided at the Hub, the Marina 

and at the Promontory. In addition to the shade provided by the 

Canopy, the design includes additional shade structures along 

the length of the Overwater Drive. 

29 What is planned for the Uplands? 

The Welcome Mat and the Hub provide infrastructure for retail 

shell space to be leased by restaurateurs or retailers. Hardscape 

and landscape improvements will be provided. 

30 Are there future plans for more 

development on the Uplands? 

The City is currently working on a Downtown Waterfront Master 

Plan that will include additional program elements on the 

Uplands. The community and City Council will decide what 

program elements shall be included, how they will be paid 

for, and when they will be implemented. Suggested Uplands 

enhancements requested by the community are found on pages 

3-17 thru 3-19 of this Report. 

31 Will the new Pier incorporate 

public art? 

The design team envisions numerous opportunities to work 

with the local art community. As the design progresses in future 

phases, further discussion regarding the incorporation of public 

art will occur. 





(continued) 

32 How wide are the bridges? 

The Overwater Drive, beginning near Spa Beach and ending 

at the Promontory, is 20-ft clear between the railings and will 

accommodate emergency vehicles, service vehicles and a 

public trolley. A vehicular turnaround large enough for fire trucks 

and the trolley is provided at the Promontory. The Overwater 

Bridge, which spans from the Hub and to the Promontory and 

accommodates pedestrians and bicycles, is 10-ft clear between 

the railings. Motor vehicles will not be accommodated on this 

portion of the new Pier. 

33 What are the sustainable design 

elements being considered? 

A conscious effort will be maintained throughout design and 

construction to prioritize durable and environmentally friendly 

products. An opportunity exists for the installation of sustainable 

technologies in the future. 

34 What are the project’s 

environmental impacts? 

The area of the Bay bottom that is shaded by the Pier will be 

reduced by approximately 90,000 sq ft due to a reduction in 

footprint, which will benefit sea life; the parking surface will 

be reduced by approximately 30,000 sq ft on the Uplands; 

and the number of pilings penetrating the Bay bottom will be 

diminished. The Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council’s Agency 

on Bay Management has stated in a report that “removal of the 

existing structure, and the replacement with a new structure that 

has no parking and limited driveway, will improve water quality in 

the area.” 

35 What is the schedule for the 

project and when will the existing 

Pier close and be demolished? 

The existing Pier will close on May 31, 2013. Demolition is 

scheduled to begin in August 2013. Construction on the new Pier 

will begin in January 2014 and last approximately 18 months. The 

new Pier will open during Fall 2015. 

36 What is the Canopy made of and 

how will the City keep it clean? 

The construction materials considered were analyzed to select 

the lowest maintenance finishes for St. Petersburg’s severe 

climate. The Canopy is made of matte finish aluminum panels 

supported on a metal structure. Exposed horizontal beams were 

eliminated from the design wherever possible to discourage 

roosts for birds. The A/E team is also considering the installation 

of a manually operated water wash system that would be 

integrally located at the top of the Canopy. 

37 What is the height at the top of 

the Canopy? How high are the 

elevated viewing platforms? 

The height at the top of the Canopy is 86 ft. The height to the 

highest elevated viewing platform is 52 ft. For reference, the 

height to the top of the existing Pier is 78 ft and the height at the 

roof terrace is 52 ft. 

3 - 12 


38 What will happen to the material 

from the demolished Pier? 

The suitable concrete material from the demolition will be used 

to stabilize the shoreline at Albert Whitted Airport. Any material 

not used will be recycled or legally disposed of. 

39 What precautions will be taken 

during construction to protect 

the environment, including the 

fish, the manatee and the water? 

The A/E team takes the environment seriously. Skanska’s 

environmental management system is certified against the 

international standard ISO 14001. In addition to managing 

conservation, environmental and natural resource concerns, 

Skanska will implement site-specific environmental protection 

measures. These include siltation barriers made of a material 

that is proven safe for manatees and other local sea life. These 

barriers are properly secured and prevent wildlife entanglement. 

Skanska’s onsite staff will regularly monitor all environmental 

protection measures including the posting of temporary signs 

prior to and during all construction activities. 

Most importantly, all construction personnel involved in the 

operation will be trained and made aware of the civil and 

criminal implications of environmental breaches. The process 

will also include an evaluation of all potential impacts during 

the proposed construction activities. Reasonable alternative 

locations and methods will be coordinated for all proposed 

uses and activities during the construction of the project. The 

potential effects on public uses, scenic and recreational values, 

and the needs and welfare of the people will be communicated. 

Skanska’s onsite team is committed to an incident free 

environment during the execution and delivery of the Lens. 

40 How will the new Pier resist 

a hurricane? Has the design 

considered projected rises in sea 

level? 

The project is being designed to comply with recently 

adopted Building Codes and the stringent Federal Emergency 

Management Act (FEMA) Guidelines. Those codes require the 

structure to withstand 145 mph wind speeds with 3 second gusts. 

To respond to wave action and sea level rise, the bottom of the 

lowest structural members are designed to be 1 ft higher than 

the base flood elevation. This will place the top surfaces of the 

new Overwater Drive and Overwater Bridge at a level 12’-0” 

above mean sea level and more than 3 ft above the deck of the 

existing Pier. 

41 Does the new Pier conflict with 

the Albert Whitted Airport flight 

paths? 

No. The height of the new Pier is well below the minimum 

levels established by the FAA. The Canopy material will be nonreflective 

in consideration of pilots on approach and takeoff. 

Night time navigation lights will be placed on top of the Canopy 

and will comply with all FAA rules. 





(continued) 

42 At the Marina, will the noise from 

motorboats be loud? Can they 

get stuck circulating below the 

bridge? How will the boats be 

protected from the rough waters 

in the Bay? 

The A/E team and City Staff were attentive to the concerns 

of the Marine Community and environmental organizations. 

The Marina at the center of the Lens will allow courtesy boat 

dockage for human powered watercraft (kayaks, canoes, standup 

paddleboards, pedal boats, etc.) or silent electric vessels only. 

The Pier Advisory Task Force recommended the provision of 

courtesy slips south of the Pelican Parking Lot, where motorized 

vessels would be able to dock. As part of the upcoming 

Downtown Waterfront Master Plan, this planning effort would 

give transient boaters easier access to the Hub’s restaurant and 

retail amenities without height restrictions. 

43 What will happen to the Museum 

of History? 

The existing Museum of History will remain open at its current 

location during construction and it is anticipated that there will 

be minimal impacts to access during construction. The new 

Pier will bring additional people past the Museum, thereby 

encouraging more patrons to visit. 

44 Will my family and I be safe on 

the new Pier? 

Yes. There will be 24 hour security, and ambulances and 

fire trucks will be able to drive out to the end of the Pier in 

emergency situations. Railings will be provided on both sides of 

all bridges and walkways. The Pier will also be evacuated prior to 

a major storm event and will remain closed to the public until the 

threat subsides. An emergency voice evacuation system will be 

provided. 

45 What is the status of the 

Underwater Feature? 

On several occasions during the BOD, the design team reached 

out to numerous members of the marine science community 

both at larger workshops and within individual meetings. While 

some members did express criticism of the process, a majority 

of the marine science community believes very strongly in the 

limitless possibilities for educating the public, and especially 

children, about the Tampa Bay estuary. The Pier’s existing piles 

will be reused and braced to create a framework for the scientific 

community’s use in establishing a viable Underwater Feature, at 

which point the design team will be ready to assist with great 

enthusiasm. 

46 How can I share my ideas and 

suggestions? 

The City has set up a dedicated website www.thenewstpetepier. 

com that includes opportunities for the public to obtain 

information on the project and provide constructive comments. 

Additional public presentations of the design will be held in the 

future. 

3 - 14 


47 Why isn’t the design more of the 

Mediterranean Revival style? 

Aesthetic opinions vary from one person to the next. The design 

of the new Pier is meant to reflect a contemporary view of a 21st 

century St. Petersburg and its waterfront. For architecture to be 

iconic, it must not have been created before. Examples such as 

the Sydney Opera House, the Eiffel Tower, and the St. Louis Arch 

are all iconic for that same reason. These buildings were subject 

to aesthetic criticism prior to their construction but, over time, 

became beloved icons. 

48 If there was more money 

available for the project, would 

the design look different? 

No. The design of the overwater Pier, its iconic Canopy, 

the Marina and the Overwater Bridge and Overwater Drive 

would not change. The additional money would be spent on 

the Uplands and go towards improvements that have been 

suggested by the community such as courtesy boat slips in the 

Central Basin, an enhanced Spa Beach, a multi-purpose exercise 

area, an event lawn with a sloped grass amphitheater and 

stage, a children’s waterpark and/or playground, and improved 

greenway connections to Beach Drive. Note that any additional 

monies will require approval from the City Council. 

49 Does the Lens have a Facebook 

page? 

WOW Our Waterfront St. Pete has a Facebook page that can 

be accessed via www.wowstpete.com. This page, created by a 

dedicated grassroots supporter of the City and the Lens, is an 

open forum for the promotion, completion, and enjoyment of 

the visionary, award-winning Lens project. 




UNDERWATER FEATURE 

OUTREACH SUMMARY 

The design team held several outreach meetings with Bay 

experts and the marine science community to hear concerns, 

gather information, discuss possible opportunities and identify 

the audience and desires for a potential Underwater Feature. 

These meetings and workshops focused on organizing the 

needs that will assist the A/E team in designing an attractive and 

educational Underwater Feature that is capable of engaging 

the public, highlighting the marine environment and marine 

restoration, and contributing to the community. This outreach 

also helped identify the constraints and criteria for creating a 

successful feature. 

The execution of an Underwater Feature, unique to St. 

Petersburg and the world, is crucial. The intention of the project 

is to engage visitors with estuarine environments on a number of 

levels: observation, awareness and interaction. 

The Underwater Feature criteria described in this section of the 

BOD Report was developed as a result of these outreach efforts 

and will guide the development of the project from conceptual 

design onward. 

Summaries of the meetings and workshops described above are 

included in Appendix F: Underwater Feature Outreach Project: 

Meeting Minutes from Technical Workshops and Interviews. 

3 - 16 


UPLANDS USAGE 

SUGGESTIONS 

The existing Uplands area is approximately 21 acres and consists 

predominantly of asphalt parking, roadway and unprogrammed, 

underutilized green space. It represents a “great divide” 

that separates the water and the Pier from the more active 

downtown. In great need of development, the Uplands should 

be further discussed as the Downtown Waterfront Master Plan 

is developed. Multiple program elements may enhance the 

experience of visitors and residents and become both visual and 

dynamic links to the new Pier. While many of the following ideas 

are suggestions from the community, none of the considerations 

below are within the $50 million approved budget. 

Transient Boat Docks 

As recommended on page 15 of the Pier Advisory Task Force 

Report, new courtesy boat docks located at the eastern entrance 

of the Central Basin, south of the Hub, would meet the sizable 

need for courtesy boat slips. Its location adjacent to the Hub 

would make it an optimal spot for water taxis, the Dolphin Cruise 

and other commercial boating enterprises. 

Expanded Greenway Trail System 

To better connect the new Pier to Bay Shore Drive NE, Beach 

Drive and The Shops at St. Pete, a looping walkway system 

should be created around the northern Uplands area connecting 

Spa Beach and the Welcome Mat to the Museum of History. 

Enhanced Civic Water Feature 

Located at the edge of Spa Beach, adjacent to the Welcome Mat 

or designed integrally with the playground, the water feature 

would provide another family friendly program element. The 

feature could be equipped with bubblers, vertical sprays and 

fountains programmed to allow for passive play on a hot day, 

yet without standing water and requiring no lifeguards. The 

fountains may be tiwmed to music and have a lighting element. 

Public restrooms will be provided at a distance complying with 

code regulations. The budget for the new Pier currently includes 

funds for a minor civic water feature; the enhancement of this 

feature was highly encouraged by the community. 

Amphitheater and Event Lawn 

Providing 1,000 to 1,400 places for blanket or lawn chair seating, 

a gently sloping, grass bowled amphitheater could provide a 

permanent location for American Stage’s performances in the 

park. When not used by American Stage, it can be an event lawn 

for larger community gatherings, public speaking events and 

spontaneous unscripted play. 

Playground 

Currently, playgrounds at Vinoy Park and Albert Whitted Park do 

not sufficiently serve the downtown area. A new playground at 

the Uplands would satisfy the requests heard during the public 

outreach presentations from numerous mothers and fathers. 

A playground with a historical theme could possibly honor the 




UPLANDS USAGE 

SUGGESTIONS 

(continued) 

legacy of Tony Jannus, William Straub and others who put St. 

Pete on the map. 

Multi-Purpose Exercise Area 

An exercise area should be covered with artificial turf or a 

synthetic surface and equipped with step-up benches, good 

lighting, drinking fountains, pull-up bars and other amenities. 

In addition to the thousands of individual residents and visitors 

using the waterfront sidewalks and parks for their own training 

and exercise, the following organized exercise groups are 

currently using Vinoy Park, Flora Willie Park, North Straub Park or 

the beach area near North Shore Pool for their training sessions: 

St. Pete Boot Camp, Baby Boot Camp, Bay View Boot Camp, I 

Train You Personal Training & Fitness and St. Pete Yoga. 

Enhanced Spa Beach 

Spa Beach is an underutilized downtown asset; it is difficult to 

access and has inadequate public amenities. Limited shade is 

provided by sparse vegetation and the site is not equipped with 

water fountains. Only one picnic table and an aging, inaccessible 

toilet building 300 ft west of the beach are located on site. The 

existing concrete retaining wall along the beach head (averaging 

about 3 ft tall above the sand) functions as a barrier to the beach. 

Ramp access for small parks maintenance service vehicles must 

be worked into the new design. Better public access should be 

created along with enhanced amenities. 

Boardwalk 

Located south of the Hub and at the eastern entrance to the 

Central Basin, the existing rock jetty could be enhanced and 

fortified in conjunction with the transient boat slips for food 

vendor carts, benches, fishing and enjoying views at the water’s 

edge. 

Pier History Trail 

Created in partnership with St. Pete Preservation Inc. and the 

City’s Community Preservation Staff, a pathway of markers or 

storyboards in an audio and/or visual format could tell the story 

of the Pier from its early beginnings in 1896 to the present day. 

Recommendations include establishing minor monuments of the 

Million Dollar Pier and Inverted Pyramid; adding new plaques 

commemorating the history of Spa Beach, including its reference 

to the segregated African American beach at Demens Landing; 

and incorporating historic motifs or reliefs to reflect the City’s 

history and Native American past. 

Parking 

Parking, in some form, should remain in at least three (3) 

locations at the Uplands: along the north side of the Central 

Basin, adjacent to the Museum of History (used by both the 

Museum of History and the Museum of Fine Arts), and adjacent 

to the Hub. 

3 - 18 


Bridge to the Vinoy 

The bridge connecting Vinoy Park to the northern Uplands is 

conceived to be “operable” to allow boat access to the North 

Basin. 

Marine Science Discovery Station 

Located at the Hub, this educational outpost would be linked to 

the Underwater Feature to provide an indication of what can be 

seen out at the Pier, and an opportunity to highlight partnerships 

with the City’s marine science community, Marine Science 

programs at the local universities, Tampa Bay Watch and other 

Marine Science businesses and organizations. While clearly an 

important opportunity for the Pier project, this feature requires a 

sponsor and/or source of funding. 

HMS Bounty Memorial 

The tragic sinking of the HMS Bounty off the North Carolina 

coast during Hurricane Sandy will not soon be forgotten. Since 

the 1970s, the HMS Bounty docked for stretches at the Pier as 

a tourist attraction. The Bounty’s Captain, Robin Walbridge, 

who went down with the ship, called St. Petersburg home. A 

respectful monument or memorial located at the new Pier, would 

honor its impact and legacy. 

Arts & Entertainment Kiosk 

An interactive kiosk located at the Uplands could provide 

information about local happenings or opportunities to purchase 

tickets to the City’s arts and entertainment venues. 




PIER ADVISORY TASK FORCE 

REPORT SUMMARY 

Formed on March 19, 2009, the 20-member Pier Advisory Task 

Force was charged with providing multiple re-development 

alternatives, reviewing the status of the Pier, and initiating 

discussions with citizens and experienced architectural and 

development consultants, among others. The Task Force’s 

ultimate goal was to submit recommendations to the City 

Council. Released in June 2010, the Pier Advisory Task Force 

Report (appearing in full as Appendix H) provided multiple 

recommendations, including that the City of St. Petersburg hold 

an international design competition to select a team for the 

design of the new Pier while including recommendations and 

conclusions based on the Task Force’s findings. The following is a 

list of the recommendations for the design of the new Pier from 

the Report; indicated by a check mark are the achievements of 

the Lens design. 

* denotes a recommendation that will be addressed as part of 

the City’s Downtown Waterfront Master Plan 

** denotes a recommendation that will be addressed by the 

City’s Transportation and Parking Management Department 

Pier & Program 

Pier needs to be a destination, not only for the region, but 

internationally as well 

Pier should be integrated into waterfront as its anchor and 

centerpiece 

Views to and from City as well as outward into the Bay 

should be preserved 

Design should be efficient, flexible - allowing for phasing of 

future development 

Program for Pier should begin as close to Uplands as 

possible if not on Uplands to reduce walking distances 

between points of interest 

Differentiation as an attraction is critical to Pier success 

Program must attract both visitors and locals 

Further exploration of a Marine Discovery Center 

Building 

Building should be an iconic structure, a worthy symbol of 

our great City 

Pier vista should remain unobstructed to allow for maximum 

views 

Once an alternative is selected, an international design 

competition is recommended to encourage creativity 

S Potential for 26,000 sq. ft. restaurant and 5,000 sq. ft. retail 

for revenue production, with additional 5,000 sq. ft. potential 

for non-revenue producing community flexible space 

Note: recommendation is partially met 

Green/LEED certified structure, energy efficient design and 

equipment 

3 - 20 


Uplands 

Water park and/or family oriented entertainment for children 

should be considered 

Restaurant/cafes should be adjacent to docks, providing 

excitement upon arrival 

Pedestrian bridge connecting Spa Park to Vinoy Park would 

provide a vital link* 

Transient docks should be provided for access by boaters 

Installation of a breakwater system in the North Basin would 

allow access for all boat sizes* 

Incorporate pedestrian/bike trails into the design of the 

Uplands and link to downtown 

Accessibility & Transportation 

Transient docks immediately south of Pelican Lot would 

provide better access for boaters* 

Enhanced trolley service is needed to create or supplement 

linkage to Pier** 

Enhanced tram/trolley or sky ride type of system connecting 

to Downtown, BayWalk and Mid-Core Garage could help 

Pier’s success** 

Accessible and convenient for disabled persons 

Potential for Port of Call* 

Further study required for North Basin mega-yacht concept* 

Financial Information 

Plan to utilize existing $50M TIF funding available, but 

consider phasing of additional development in plan if 

supplemental funding becomes accessible at later time 

Focus on restaurant-based program to provide maximum 

contribution to Pier overhead 

Continue to pursue all state and federal grants 

Strong consideration required regarding long-term 

maintenance costs of both Pier and building alternatives 

ultimately selected 

Retail should be considered only to support the family 

entertainment objective 

Summary 

The success of the Lens in achieving the various 

recommendations of the Pier Advisory Task Force is a reflection 

of the A/E team’s commitment to the needs of the City of St. 

Petersburg and its citizens. Because the new Pier fits into a more 

extensive re-shaping of the City’s downtown waterfront, the Lens 

should be considered a catalyst for new development that will 

grow organically over time. 




SITE AND URBAN 

DESIGN CRITERIA 

Site Location and Orientation 

St. Petersburg Pier 

800 2 nd Avenue NE 

St. Petersburg, Florida 33701 

T: 727 821 6443 

www.stpetepier.com 

Latitude 28° N, Longitude 83° W 

The site is located in downtown St. Petersburg, Florida. Oriented 

along an east-west axis, the Pier functions as an extension of 2 nd 

Avenue NE into Tampa Bay. Whereas the Pier encompasses the 

area east of the sea wall, the portion of the site located between 

Bay Shore Drive NE and the seawall is referred to as the Uplands. 

The Pier approach, a roadway accommodating vehicles, bicycles 

and pedestrians, bridges the Uplands and the Pier head. The 

five-story Inverted Pyramid, constructed in 1973, presently 

occupies the Pier. 

Existing Site Use 

Figure 3.3 illustrates the current uses of the site. The Pier is 

owned by the City of St. Petersburg and is administered by the 

Downtown Enterprise Facilities Department of the City. Urban 

Retail Properties, LLC has been managing and marketing the 

Pier since 2001. 

Existing Pier Head and Pier Approach 

The first Pier Pavilion opened in 1895. The 1926 million Dollar 

Pier building was torn down in 1967 and replaced in 1973 by the 

Inverted Pyramid structure that currently occupying the site. The 

Pier’s 1988 renovation incorporated new programmatic elements 

such as shops, galleries and restaurants. Activities on the Pier 

encompass fishing, festivals and the Pier Aquarium. Fishing 

takes place on the Pier approach and around the exterior of 

the building along the sea walls. Daily sightseeing boat tours 

are also launched from the Pier and educational programs have 

been held at the Education Station on Pier approach. Metered 

and valet parking is available on the Pier approach. 

Existing Uplands Area 

The Uplands area, approximately 21 acres, is divided into three 

parcels: the West, South, and North Parcels. The area east of Bay 

Shore Drive consists of landscaped parkland, civic structures, 

and beaches. Two parking lots accommodating cars and tour 

buses are located in the Uplands area – the Dolphin Lot and 

the Pelican Lot. The City’s Capital Improvement Plan calls for 

the replacement of a small building with restrooms, and park 

maintenance storage space in the near future. The Uplands area 

is also the site of the St. Petersburg Museum of History, Spa 

Beach, and Fresco’s Waterfront Bistro, located on the corner of 

2 nd Avenue NE and Bay Shore Drive. At the southern edge are 

the existing Marina and Central Basin; the northern edge abuts 

the North Basin. 

3 - 22 


City of St. Petersburg 

Tampa Bay 

St. Petersburg Pier 

Figure 3.2 Site Context 

North Basin 

North Parcel 

Spa Beach 

Pier Head 

Dolphin 

Parking Lot 

West Parcel 

Spa 

Beach 

Park 

Inverted Pyramid 

South Parcel 

Fresco’s Waterfront 

Bistro 

St. Petersburg 

Museum of History 

Central Basin 

Pier Approach 

Pelican 

Parking Lot 

Figure 3.3 Current Uses of Site 






(continued) 

Existing Building Use 

The existing five-story Inverted Pyramid building, located at the 

eastern edge of the Pier, overlooks Tampa Bay. The total square 

footage of the existing Pier building is approximately 78,900 sq. 

ft., with approximately 49,800 sq. ft. of leasable space. 

The first level of the structure is occupied by fourteen specialty 

stores, galleries, and boutiques as well as a concierge center, 

the Dockside Eatery food court, and Jonny Reno’s Waterfront 

Grill & Watering Hole. A community meeting room is located 

near the food court. On the second floor is the Pier Aquarium, 

a private, non-profit community marine education center, which 

encompasses several sea life tanks, exhibits and a museum 

store. The third level is available for events and houses offices 

for the Pier Aquarium and Urban Retail Properties. The fourth 

level is home to the Columbia restaurant, while the fifth floor is 

occupied by Cha Cha Coconuts Tropical Bar and Grill, as well as 

the Observation Deck. The Pier’s courtyard, located on the east 

side of the Pier, hosts special events and live music. 

The Pier Bait House at the south-west corner of the Pier rents out 

fishing poles and sells bait. Bicycles may be rented at Wheel Fun 

Rentals opposite the Pier Bait House. 

Historic Buildings and Monuments 

The 1927 Comfort Station designed by Henry Taylor is an 

unaltered example of the Romanesque Revival style. Located 

on the Uplands at the northeast corner of Bay Shore Drive and 

2 nd Avenue NE, the octagonal design is on the Local Historic 

Register. 

The Tony Jannus Memorial, commemorating the site of the 

world’s first commercial airline flight on January 1, 1914, is 

located on the Uplands, just west of the Pelican Lot. In the 

parking circle just east of the Museum of History, a monument 

commemorates the American Institute of Aeronautics and 

Astronautics (AIAA) designation of the Central Basin as a 

“Historic Aerospace Site” - the place of the first commercial 

airline flight. 

The Bait House and Wheel Fun Rentals, architectural examples 

of the Mediterranean Revival style, date back to the original 

Million Dollar Pier. Saving and relocating these small functional 

structures would respect the heritage of the Pier. 

A number of commemorative plaques remain at the Pier, 

including a plaque for St. Petersburg’s own Wimbledon 

champion Shirley Fry Irvin, an “honorary owner” of the Municipal 

Pier. 

3 - 24 


Figure 3.4 Existing Pier Head 

Comfort Station (1927) 

Architect: Henry Taylor 

AIAA Historic Aerospace 

Site Monument 

Tony Jannus Memorial 

Wheel Fun and Bait 

House Structures 

Figure 3.5 Historic Buildings 






(continued) 

Adjacent Land Uses 

The St. Petersburg Pier is located in the City’s downtown 

waterfront area, a dense urban location on Tampa Bay adjacent 

to several cultural, commercial and recreational amenities. 

Immediately west of the Uplands, between Bay Shore Drive 

NE and Beach Drive NE, is Straub Park, which is the site of the 

Museum of Fine Arts and a short walk from the Uplands’ St. 

Petersburg Museum of History. Straub Park hosts a variety of 

community events throughout the year including Movies in the 

Park, the Holiday Tree Lighting Festival, Santa’s Wonderland and 

numerous running and walking events. 

Just north of the Uplands are Vinoy Park and the North Basin. 

Vinoy Park hosts a large variety of community events throughout 

the year including the Rock ‘n’ Roll Half Marathon, food festivals, 

concerts, art festivals and the internationally acclaimed St. 

Anthony’s Triathlon. 

To the south of the Pier are Demens Landing Park and the 

St. Petersburg Municipal Marina, one of the largest marinas 

in the Southeast with more than 600 rental boat slips. The St. 

Petersburg Sailing Center is located at the south-west corner of 

Demens Landing. Events such as American Stage in the Park are 

also held at Demens Landing Park. 

Adjacent to the Marina and west of Bay Shore Drive Southeast 

are the Salvador Dalì Museum, the Mahaffey Theatre, Al Lang 

Field and a lot that currently hosts the Saturday Morning Market. 

Albert Whitted Airport is located across from the Dalì Museum 

at the end of Bay Shore Drive S.E. Albert Whitted Airport Park 

anchors the waterfront park system to the south. 

Appendix I: Vision/Guiding Principles and Context for 

the Preparation of a Downtown Waterfront Master Plan, 

December 2011 of this Report lists the guiding principles for 

the development of the downtown and waterfront areas of St. 

Petersburg and its connections to the greater urban context. 

Figure 3.6 locates the aforementioned areas of interest in 

proximity to the St. Petersburg Pier. 

3 - 26 


North Shore Pool 

Vinoy Renaissance 

St Petersburg Resort 

and Golf Club 

Chihuly Collection 


Museum of History 

Museum of 

Fine Arts 

Muvico Theatres 

North 

Straub 

Park 

North 

Basin 

Vinoy Park 

Mirror 

Lake 

The Shops at St. Pete 


Yacht Club 

South 

Straub 

Park 

Central 

Basin 

Municipal Marina 

Ships Store 

Pioneer 

Park 


Sailing Center 

Demens Landing 

Al Lang Field 

Mahaffey Theater 

South 

Basin 

Albert Whitted Airport Park 

Salvador Dalì Museum 

Port of St. Petersburg 

Albert 

Whitted 

Airport 

University of South Florida 

College of Marine Science 

University of 

South Florida 


Figure 3.6 Points of Interest Adjacent to the Pier 






(continued) 

Photographic Documentation of Site Context 

The following are images documenting the site and the 

surrounding context. 

3.7 

3.9 

3.10 

3.11 

3.12 

3.8 

Figure 3.7 Aerial View of Existing Pier 

3 - 28 


Figure 3.8 View of Uplands, 2nd Avenue NE and North Basin 

Figure 3.9 West Elevation of Inverted Pyramid Building 

Figure 3.10 View of Demens Landing Park and Municipal Marina 

Figure 3.11 View of Skyline from Observation Deck 

Figure 3.12 View of Pier from South-West 






(continued) 

3.14 

3.13 

3.17 

3.16 

3.15 

Figure 3.17 View of Skyline from Pier Approach 

3 - 30 


Figure 3.13 View of Inverted Pyramid from Pier Approach 

Figure 3.14 View of Pier Approach 

Figure 3.15 View of Inverted Pyramid from South 

Figure 3.16 Bird’s Eye View of Pier, Pier Approach and Uplands 






(continued) 

Zoning Guidelines 

The City’s Development Review Services Division served as a 

resource for the following information. 

The downtown area is the traditional gathering center of 

the City. Since its inception, it has been the regional center, 

attracting residents and visitors for recreation, socializing, 

shopping and business. It is also a vibrant residential 

neighborhood offering a variety of housing typologies. The City 

is fortunate to have created and maintained a strong pedestrianoriented 

streetscape, with its grid street pattern and buildings 

at a typical 2 to 4- story scale along its wide sidewalks. Although 

high rise buildings, including those that occupy a full city block, 

have been added to the downtown area, they are the exception, 

retaining a pedestrian character at the sidewalk. The 100 ft. 

wide right-of-way allows ample room for vehicles in the street 

travel lanes, on-street parking, and pedestrian sidewalks. Future 

development should recognize and reinforce the pedestrian 

scale as a key asset by protecting the right-of-way through both 

the selection and location of pedestrian-oriented businesses. 

Development regulations for the downtown area require that 

the base of all buildings create and maintain a strongly defined 

street edge, while allowing and encouraging larger and taller 

buildings to be constructed above and stepped back into the 

property. By reinforcing the street edges, providing active 

uses, concealing parking areas and requiring streetscape 

improvements, vibrant activity will continue at the street level. 

Figure 3.18 describes zoning guidelines for the downtown 

waterfront area of St. Petersburg. The blue color that covers the 

Pier and other areas represents the DC-3 zoning district. The 

green color on the abutting land represents the DC-P district. 

Noted are the City’s allowable lease terms for buildings leased 

by private entities. The southern portion of the Uplands (the area 

of the Hub) allows a 10-year lease, while the northern portion 

allows a 5-year lease. 

The DC-3 zoning district encourages development of residential, 

offices, hotels, specialty retail and other permitted mixed 

uses compatible with the waterfront area with emphasis on 

pedestrian-oriented development at the street level. There is no 

required waterfront setback in the DC-3 zone, but projects must 

adhere to a building-to-building setback along interior property 

lines; for portions of a building located above 50 ft. in height, a 

building setback along streets and an additional setback along 

Beach Drive are applicable. 

The DC-P district denotes lands that are public parks or 

developments within public parks, east of Beach Drive. In 

these areas, heights and development intensities are limited 

and setbacks are generous to maintain a sense of open space 

adjacent to the public spaces. 

3 - 32 


10 yr lease 

5 yr lease 

10 yr lease 

10 yr lease 

LEGEND 

DC-3 zoning district 

DC-P zoning district 

Figure 3.18 Zoning Plan 

Height Limitation Height Limitation Height Limitation Height Limitation 

+158 ft +108 ft +108 ft 

+158 ft 

dist = 275 ft 

dist = 330 ft 

dist = 400 ft 

dist = 1043 ft 

Shoreline 

Centerline of Current Runway 

(No significant vertical structures allowed. 

Bridge structures acceptable.) 

Figure 3.19 Height Limitations in Vicinity of Albert Whitted Airport 






(continued) 

2 nd Avenue NE is a Pedestrian Level “A” Street. The abutting 

public sidewalk shall be improved in compliance with the 

streetscape treatment plan identified in the Plaza Parkway 

Design Guidelines. 

Maximum building height on the north and south Uplands, 

without a variance, is 50 ft. Maximum building height in the area 

of the current Pier head is 125 ft. Staff approval through the 

Streamline process is allowed if a structure is between 125 and 

150 ft. Above 150 ft., a public hearing is required. 

Additional height limitations result from the proximity of Albert 

Whitted Airport directly south of the Pier and are directly 

related to the distance one moves away from the shoreline, as 

described in Figure 3.19. The north-south runway for the airport 

is perpendicularly aligned with the Pier approach. Although 

not a technical regulation, the Airport has determined that no 

significant vertical structures are permitted on the Pier in the 70 

ft. wide area directly in line with the runway. While Figure 3.19 

denotes the current alignment of the runway, it is scheduled 

to be realigned 33 ft to the east in the future. All other height 

limitations on the site are dictated by the FAA regulations 

controlling heights within the proximity of a runway. Figure 3.20 

describes height limitations for the areas in vicinity of the Airport 

corresponding to Federal Aviation Administration Regulations, 

Part 77. 

3 - 34 


PRIMARY ZONE 

PRIMARY Height (Feet ZONE Above Mean Sea Level - AMSL) of runway at center line 

Height (Feet Above Mean Sea Level - AMSL) of runway at center line 

HORIZONTAL ZONE 

HORIZONTAL 158’above mean ZONE sea level. The zone is delineated by connecting 

158’above arcs radiating mean 5000’ sea from level. the The end zone of each is delineated primary zone. by connecting 

arcs radiating 5000’ from the end of each primary zone. 

CONICAL ZONE 

Starts CONICAL at the ZONE Horizontal Zone elevation (158’ AMSL) increasing 1’ 

vertically Starts at the for Horizontal each 20’ horizontally, Zone elevation ending (158’ 200’ AMSL) above increasing Horizontal 1’ Zone 

elevation. vertically for each 20’ horizontally, ending 200’ above Horizontal Zone 

elevation. 

TRANSNATIONAL ZONE 

TRANSNATIONAL Starts at the Approach ZONE Zone height, increasing 1’ for each 7’ 

Starts horizontal, at the ending Approach at the Zone Horizontal height, Zone increasing elevation 1’ for (158’ each AMSL). 7’ 

horizontal, NOTE: There ending is no at Transitional the Horizontal Zone Zone for that elevation portion (158’ of the AMSL). Approach 

NOTE: Zone extending There is no above Transitional the Horizontal Zone for Zone that elevation portion of (158’ the AMSL). Approach 

Zone extending above the Horizontal Zone elevation (158’ AMSL). 

APPROACH ZONE 

APPROACH Starts at the Primary ZONE Zone hiehgt for each runway end; increasing 1’ 

Starts vertically at the for Primary each 20’ Zone horizontally hiehgt for from each that runway Primary end; Zone increasing end and 1’ 

vertically ending 5000’ for each ou & 20’ 250’ horizontally above the from Primary that Zone Primary height. Zone NOTE: end and The 

ending outer approximate 5000’ ou & 250’ 2000’ above of each the approach Primary Zone surface height. lies above NOTE: the The 

outer Airport’s approximate Horizontal 2000’ Surface. of each approach surface lies above the 

Airport’s Horizontal Surface. 

Figure 3.20 Height Limitations 






(continued) 

Environmental Considerations 

The State of Florida regulates coastal construction, including all 

gulf and ocean fishing piers. In 1995, the Florida Department 

of Environmental Protection (FDEP) initiated the concurrent 

processing of applications for coastal construction permits, 

environmental resource permits, wetland resource permits and 

sovereign submerged lands authorizations, eliminating the 

potential for conflict between permitting agencies. 

The state environmental regulatory program ensures that any 

fishing pier construction does not degrade water quality through 

the loss of wetlands, through improper in-water construction 

techniques, or through the creation of excessive turbidity. This 

regulatory program also ensures that pier construction and 

operation causes no harm or damage to protected wildlife 

species or important marine resources, including corals, 

seagrasses, mangroves, or manatee or marine turtle habitats. 

Existing seagrass beds are located near the shoreline in water 

depths ranging from 4 to 9 ft. No seagrass was identified in the 

100-ft. wide area where the existing Pier crosses these depths. 

Construction barges will be prohibited from approaching within 

20-ft. of the existing seagrass beds. 

Essential fish habitat in the Pier area is generally comprised of 

construction debris that has fallen from the Pier over time. This 

material will be left in place, where possible. 

Manatees and sawtooth fish are found in the project area. No 

endangered bird species habitat has been observed in the 

project area. Construction is expected to conform to standard 

manatee construction guidelines, including slow speed 

waterborne equipment, observing for the presence of manatees 

and ceasing work when a manatee is present. Figure 3.21 

describes the existing seagrass beds and essential fish habitats 

in the project area. 

Existing water depths in the vicinity of the marina range from 10 

to 12 ft. NAVD (8.9 to 10.9 ft. MLW). 

3 - 36 


Text 

LEGEND 

Seagrass Limits (July 2012) 

EFH Limits (May 2011 and July 2012) 

Figure 3.21 2012 Seagrass and Essential Fish Habitat Survey Results 






(continued) 

Existing Structures to be Retained or Demolished 

Due to concrete and structural deterioration at the Pier approach 

and head, continued general repairs are not seen as a viable 

long-term solution for the existing Pier. It has been determined 

that replacement of these areas is necessary, particularly because 

many components of the structure date back to its original 1926 

construction (Appendix H: Pier Advisory Task Force Report, p.8). 

Additional information specifically concerning the Pier’s existing 

conditions at the Pier approach, building foundation and 

Inverted Pyramid may be found in Appendix L: City Pier Building 

Foundation Evaluation, March 1, 2010 (Moffatt & Nichol) as well 

as in Appendix H: Pier Advisory Task Force Report (pp.8-9). 

Figure 3.22 highlights the area of the site that is subject to 

demolition. Though the limits of the Pier demolition extend past 

the seawall and run along Spa Beach, the great majority of the 

Uplands area does not entail any demolition. 

Parking Requirements 

There are over 1,000 events in downtown St. Petersburg each 

year. The City’s Transportation and Parking Management 

Department staff maintains and improves the transportation 

system for the safe and efficient movement of people, goods 

and services. On-street management of spaces is conducted 

primarily through time limits and parking meters to encourage 

vehicle turnover. The current Pelican Lot on the south side of the 

Uplands accommodates 157 cars, while the Dolphin Lot on the 

north side accommodates 312 cars. 

Parking requirements for restaurants and retail will generally fall 

into the one (1) space per 500 sq. ft. of conditioned building 

area. Parking will be required for table and chair seating at the 

Promontory and at any large open terraces associated with 

concession spaces and restaurants. Disabled parking will be 

provided as required by code and valet parking may be provided 

by the operator of the Hub restaurant. In general it is anticipated 

that the parking that will remain at the Pelican Lot will be more 

than sufficient for the proposed Pier development. 

3 - 38 


Figure 3.22 Pier Deck Demolition Plan 






(continued) 

Building Visibility 

The new Pier’s exceptional location within the City and its role 

as the primary attraction of the City’s waterfront means that it 

will be seen and experienced in a variety of ways. Because of 

its centrality in the downtown waterfront area, the 2nd Avenue 

North view corridor looking east from Bay Shore Drive should 

remain open and free of major obstructions as much as possible, 

following the recommendation of the Pier Advisory Task Force 

and the Downtown Neighborhood Association (Appendix H: Pier 

Advisory Task Force Report, p.38). Figure 3.23 shows the view 

looking east along 2nd Avenue NE toward the existing Inverted 

Pyramid. 

General Security Requirements 

The new Pier is an extension of the City’s Waterfront Park 

system. The Downtown Enterprise Facilities Department 

currently manages the Pier, and the City’s Parks and Recreation 

Department maintains the Uplands. It is still to be determined 

the best methods, departments and/or subcontracted firms to 

manage the New St. Petersburg Pier, but it is anticipated that the 

Downtown Enterprise Facilities Department will manage the Hub 

restaurant at this time. 

City Parks are open sunrise to sunset. It is expected that the 

future dining amenities on the overwater portion of the new 

Pier will be open until 11 pm on weekdays and 1 am or later on 

weekends. The elevator to the Balconies on the Canopy will only 

be operable during typical food service times at the Promontory. 

Nighttime lighting will provide adequate footcandle levels 

to allow safety patrols. The overwater portion of the Pier will 

be evacuated in periods of severe weather alerts and closed 

until the City determines that the danger has safely passed. 

A removable swing gate or retractable bollard system will be 

installed at the entrances to the Overwater Drive to prevent 

access. Changeable lighted signage, mounted in a conspicuous 

place at the Pier entrance, will be used for public communication 

purposes. The Pier will have security staff, who will patrol the 

Marina at night. If security perceives an unsafe situation after 

dark, they can notify the police or marine patrol. Security staff at 

the City’s marina are also available to assist. 

3 - 40 


Figure 3.23 View Looking East Along 2nd Avenue NE 






(continued) 

Site Access 

Figure 3.24 illustrates the existing routes of access to the St. 

Petersburg Pier. The major street arterials for the site are Second 

Avenue NE and Bay Shore Drive NE The primary freeways in 

proximity of the site are I-175, I-275 and I-375 

Public Transit Lines 

Central Avenue Trolley: operating 7 days per week, free fare 

between the Pier and The Shops at St. Pete (formerly BayWalk), 

$0.50 reduced fare from Grand Central Station at Central Avenue 

and 31st Street. 

Downtown Looper: operating 7 days per week, 50 cent fare with 

service every 15 minutes 

During operating hours (Sun-Thu 10 am-5 pm, Fri/Sat 10 ammidnight), 

the Looper stops at each Pier lot on its way to and 

from the Pier. Service to and from the Pier head is provided 

approximately every 15 minutes. Additionally, the Central 

Avenue Trolley (CAT) operates an overlapping route to and from 

the Pier that also serves the lots, at the same frequency as the 

Looper. However, the CAT’s last stop at the Pier is at 11:10 pm on 

Friday and Saturday, as opposed to midnight for the Looper. This 

combined service provides an average 7.5 minute headway from 

10 am to 5 pm, Monday through Friday. On nights and weekends 

the average headway is approximately 10-15 minutes. 

In addition to the above-described service, the Pier utilizes cityowned 

trolleys to provide service for employees before the Pier 

opens in the morning and after it closes at night, with city-owned 

vehicles augmenting Looper and CAT service during nights and 

weekends to reduce the headways and accommodate larger 

capacity crowds. This allows night/weekend headways to be in 

the 5 to 7 minute range. 

City-owned trolleys have a capacity of 26, while the two models 

of the Looper trolleys have respective capacities of 15 (open air) 

and 28 (enclosed). CAT vehicles are 35 passenger trolleys. 28 and 

35 passenger trolleys use diesel; the 15 and 26 passenger trolleys 

use gas. A portion of the CAT vehicles are hybrid diesel/electric. 

All vehicles have wheelchair lifts. 

Trails 

St. Petersburg’s CityTrails are facilities for non-motorized traffic, 

primarily bicyclists and pedestrians. The North Bay Trail provides 

access from the starting point of the Pinellas Trail at 1st Avenue 

South and Bay Shore Drive north to Vinoy Park, North Shore Pool 

and Park, the Gisella Kopsick Arboretum, Flora Wylie Park, Elva 

Rouse Park and to the Centennial Human Sundial at Vista Point. 

The existing downtown North Bay Trail system will be enhanced 

with 1 mile of out and back trail at the new Pier. 

www.stpetecitytrails.org 

3 - 42 


5th Av N 

4th St N 

3rd St N 

2nd St N 

1st St N 

I-375 

4th Av N 

Beach Dr 

Bay Shore Dr 

2nd Av N 

1st Av N 

Central Av 

1st Av S 

I-175 

Figure 3.24 Existing Site Access Routes 

5th Av S 

4th St S 

3rd St S 

2nd St S 

1st St S 

Major Vehicular Routes 

Central Avenue Shuttle 

Downtown Looper 

Freeways 

BlueWays Trail 

Bike Trail 






(continued) 

BlueWays Kayak Trails run all along St. Petersburg’s scenic 

coast line from Fort Desoto Park, north past the Pier and up 

to Weedon Island Preserve where paddlers can experience a 

diverse thriving ecosystem. Each CityTrails BlueWay presents a 

unique environmental, historic and/or scenic vista opportunity. 

The Downtown Waterfront BlueWay begins at Coffee Pot Park 

and follows the waterfront south to Demens Landing at the 

Central Basin. The new Pier will provide another designated 

landing opportunity where paddlers can enjoy all that downtown 

has to offer. The kayak dock at the new Pier will be equipped 

with a floating dock, wash station and a method to secure 

watercraft. www.stpete.org/outside/blueways.asp 

Site Accessibility 

It is essential that the site be accessible to each of the following: 

• Pedestrians 

• Patrons and staff picked up or dropped off by car or bus 

• Patrons and staff on bicycles 

• Patrons and staff with disabilities 

• Service and emergency vehicles 

Pedestrians 

The site should relate strongly to the adjacent streetscape. 

Pedestrian traffic must flow easily to the new Pier via existing 

sidewalks. Reflecting the general guiding principles of the 

“Vision/Guiding Principles and Context for the Preparation of 

a Downtown Waterfront Master Plan, December 2011”, public 

access will be prioritized in the following hierarchy when feasible: 

pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit and motorized vehicles 

(Appendix H, p. 5). 

Patron/Staff Drop-Off Points 

The new Pier will act as a major focus of downtown and 

waterfront activity. The site development should be mindful of 

existing bus stops and access to public transportation routes. In 

addition, the site development should include a zone for taxi, 

bus and private vehicle drop-off. 

3 - 44 


Service Vehicles 

The City’s Parks and Recreation Department will operate and 

maintain the grounds and buildings on the Upland park lands, 

including Spa Beach, the public restrooms and other public 

facilities. Because seagrasses frequently wash ashore along 

Spa Beach, access to this part of the site via a service vehicle 

ramp will be required for cleanup. The Parks and Recreation 

Department is not currently responsible for maintaining the Pier. 

Economic Development Opportunities 

Community Redevelopment Areas 

The Florida Legislature passed the Community Redevelopment 

Act in 1969, allowing for the establishment of Community 

Redevelopment Agencies throughout Florida. These Agencies 

have the authority to create Community Redevelopment Areas 

(CRA’s) with the purpose of encouraging economic development 

and redevelopment. 

In St. Petersburg, the Community Redevelopment Agency (the 

City Council) created (7) CRA’s beginning in 1981 with the Intown 

(Downtown) Redevelopment Area, shown in red in Figure 3.25: 

Community Redevelopment Areas Map. The City then prepared 

a Community Redevelopment Plan to guide the projects to be 

carried out within the Intown Redevelopment Area. 

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Revenue 

Community Redevelopment Areas have a unique financing 

method available to fund city projects called Tax Increment 

Financing. When the City established the Intown Redevelopment 

Plan in 1981, the assessed value of the properties in the area in 

red was frozen. The value of this frozen base was roughly $108 

million. 

City and County property taxes generated from the growth in 

the assessed value over the frozen base are placed in a special 

Trust Fund to be used to fund approved projects within the 

redevelopment area. The taxes generated on the frozen base 

continue to be available to all local taxing agencies for operating 

purposes (City, County, and School Board). 

In 2012, the assessed value of the area in red was almost 

$820 million. This $712 million increment over the frozen base 

value of 1981 generated $7.3 million of TIF revenues during 

fiscal year 2012 that was used to pay for approved projects. It 

is estimated that $162 million of TIF funds will be generated 

between 2013 and 2032 (the current end date for City/County 

funding of the Intown TIF). All TIF revenues generated by the 

redevelopment area must be spent on approved projects within 

that redevelopment area (the area in red in Figure 3.25). 

Intown (Downtown) Redevelopment Projects 

The City’s Intown Redevelopment Plan and its TIF funding 

have been used to complete many public improvement 






(continued) 

projects throughout the downtown area including: Tropicana 

Field, BayWalk, MidCore & SouthCore Parking Garages, 

Streetscape Programs, Waterfront Parks Improvements, Museum 

Development and others. 

In 2005, the Intown Redevelopment Plan was amended to add 

projects including the renovations to the Mahaffey Theater, the 

Dalì Museum and the proposed Pier project. Other downtown 

projects to be funded from future TIF Funds include a new 

mixed use transportation facility and pedestrian streetscape and 

downtown park improvements. 

As was the case with the Mahaffey Theater renovation project, 

the majority of the Pier project will be accomplished using debt 

financing. The City will borrow funds in the municipal bond 

market and the debt service (principal and interest) will be paid 

using the TIF revenues discussed above. 

Based upon historic and current City/County millage rates, the 

City TIF revenues will fund approximately 55% of the Intown 

Projects with the County share being approximately 45%. 

Example 

The following is an example of the application of the funding 

concept described above. This example explains where TIF 

money comes from and thus how the municipal bonds serving 

the Pier project will be paid back. 

John Doe owns a commercial office building downtown. In 

1981 the property was valued at $100,000. In 2012, that same 

property was valued at $650,000. John’s 2012 City taxes on 

the $550,000 increment (the $650,000 current value minus 

the $100,000 value in 1981) are $3,252 (based on a City 

millage rate of 5.9125). His 2012 Pinellas County taxes on the 

$550,000 increment are $2,680 (based upon a County millage 

rate of 4.873). The $3,252 plus the $2,680 are placed in the 

TIF Trust Fund pot along with the incremental tax money 

from other downtown property owners. 

Based on this model, the City will borrow the funds to pay for 

the new Pier project using 20-year municipal bonds (currently 

at historically low interest rates) and will repay these borrowed 

funds using the TIF Trust Fund pot of money. 

3 - 46 


Figure 3.25 Community Redevelopment Areas 






(continued) 

Water Levels 

Tides in the Tampa Bay region are mixed semi-diurnal tides, 

meaning water levels may exhibit one high and low tide (diurnal) 

or two high and two low tides (semi-diurnal) in any given day or 

cycle. 

Figure 3.26 describes the relationship between the three 

different water level datum systems relevant to the new Pier 

(NAVD 88, NGVD 29 and the St. Petersburg Datum) and lists key 

water level data for the St. Petersburg Pier. Tidal information 

was obtained from NOAA Station 8726520 located near the St. 

Petersburg Coast Guard station. This data was accumulated over 

19 years of measurements, from 1983 to 2001. 

Sea Level Rise 

With sea levels around the world rising, human populations living 

in coastal regions and ecosystems in the natural environment 

may potentially be impacted. Global average sea level rose at 

an average of around 1.7 +/- 0.3 mm per year from 1950 to 2009 

and at a satellite-measured average rate of about 3.3 +/- 0.4 

mm per year from 1993 to 2009, an increase on earlier estimates. 

Though it is unclear whether the rate reflects an increase in 

the underlying long term trend, observed sea level rise has 

been taken into consideration in the design of the new Pier, in 

particular because the project has a 75-year life span. 

In response to wave action and sea level rise, the bottom of the 

lowest structural members are designed to be 1 ft higher than 

the base flood elevation. This will place the top surfaces of the 

new Overwater Drive and Bridge at a level 12 ft above mean sea 

level and more than 3 ft above the deck of the existing Pier. 

Floodplain Management 

Preliminary code analysis and floodplain management 

considerations are as follows. 

Scour at the structure foundation varies depending on the 

structure type and dimensions. The depth and design impact of 

scour on the proposed structure should be evaluated for a 100- 

year return period event. 

Storm surge data from the most recent FEMA Flood Insurance 

Study (FIS) for Pinellas County (2003) lists the water level at 5.7 

ft for a return period of 25 years, 7.0 ft for a return period of 50 

years and 8.3 ft for a return period of 100 years. 

Figure 3.27 is used to administer the National Flood Insurance 

Program for Pinellas County, Florida. An explanation of the 

design implications for the new Pier, which is subject to extreme 

environmental conditions, can be found in the ‘Accessibility and 

Code Requirements’ section of this Report. 

For additional information pertaining to floodplain management 

refer to Appendix K: Flood Resistant Design and Construction, 

which contains highlights of ASCE 24-05, a referenced standard 

3 - 48 


NAVD 88 

(NORTH AMERICAN 

VERTICAL DATUM) 

NGVD 29 

(NATIONAL GEODETIC 

VERTICAL DATUM) 

ST. PETERSBURG 

DATUM 

Highest Observed 

Water Level (08/31/1985) 

4.80’ NAVD 88 

4’ NAVD 88 

4.88’ NGVD 29 

101.88’ St. Pete Datum 

Flood Elevation 

3’ NAVD 88 

3.88’ NGVD 29 


Mean Higher 

High Water (MHHW) 

2’ NAVD 88 

2.88’ NGVD 29 


Mean High 

Water (MHW) 

Mean Sea 

Level (MSL) 

1.00’ NAVD 88 

0.88’ NAVD 88 

0.52’ NAVD 88 

-0.26’ NAVD 88 

1’ NAVD 88 

0’ NAVD 88 

1.88’ NGVD 29 

0.88’ NGVD 29 



Mean Low 

Water Level (MLW) 

-1.08’ NAVD 88 

-1.46’ NAVD 88 

-1’ NAVD 88 

-0.12’ NGVD 29 


-2’ NAVD 88 

-1.12’ NGVD 29 


Mean Lower Low 

Water Level (MLLW) 

-3’ NAVD 88 

-2.12’ NGVD 29 


Lowest Observed 

Water Level (01/16/1972) 

-3.93’ NAVD 88 

-4’ NAVD 88 

-3.12’ NGVD 29 


Figure 3.26 Datum Conversion Diagram 

LEGEND 

SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS INUNDATED 

BY 100-YEAR FLOOD 

Zone A No base flood elevations determined. 

Zone AE Base flood elevations determined. 

Zone AH Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of 

ponding); base flood elevations determined. 

Zone AO Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually sheet 

flow on sloping terrain); average depths 

determined. 

Zone A99 To be protected from 100-year flood by 

Federal flood protection system under 

construction; no base flood elevations 

determined. 

Zone V Coastal flood with velocity hazard (wave 

action); no base flood elevations determined. 

Zone VE Coastal flood with velocity hazard (wave 

action); base flood elevations 

determined. 

FLOODWAY AREAS INUNDATED IN ZONE AE 

OTHER FLOOD AREAS 

Zone X 

Areas of 500-year flood; areas of 100-year 

flood with average depths of less than 1 

foot or with drainage area less than 1 

square mile; and areas protected by 

levees from 100-year floor. 

OTHER AREAS 

Zone X Areas determined to be outside 500-year 

floodplain. 

Zone X Areas in which flood hazards are 

undetermined. 

Figure 3.27 Flood Insurance Rate Map for Pinellas County, Florida and Incorporated Areas 






(continued) 

in the International Building Code and the Florida Building Code 

for buildings and structures proposed in flood hazard areas. 

Applicable Code 

• St. Petersburg, Florida, Code of Ordinances, Chapter 

16 – Land Development Regulations, Section 16.40.050 – 

Floodplain Management. 

• Florida Building Code 2010 with Amendments 

• South Florida Water Management District 

• Pinellas County Water and Navigation Code 

• Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 

Wind Data 

Extreme value analysis of historical wind speeds recorded at 

MacDill Air Force Base from 1941 to 2011 indicate the following 

wind speed return periods: 

• 25-year return period: 74 mph 



Wind data is sourced from the document Metocean and 

Structural Concept Level Design Basis prepared by Moffatt & 

Nichol for the St. Petersburg Design Competition. 

Figure 3.28 depicts winds recorded at Albert Whitted Airport 

in St. Petersburg between the years of 1995 and 2012. The 

recurrence of directional extreme winds should be further 

evaluated for final design. 

3 - 50 


Wind Speed (mph) 

2 - 5 

5 - 7 

7 - 10 

10 - 15 

15 - 20 

20 + 

Windrose Period of Record: 01 Nov 1995 - 01 Nov 2012 

Observation Count: 138685 

Average Speed: 8.7 mph 

Figure 3.28 Wind Rose for Albert Whitted Airport. Source: National Climatic Data Center 






(continued) 

Geography and Climate Data 

Extending along the western shoreline of Tampa Bay in the area 

commonly referred to as Middle Tampa Bay, the St. Petersburg 

Pier is located in Pinellas County, Florida. With a population of 

244,769 (as of the 2010 census), St. Petersburg is the second 

largest city in the Tampa Bay Area. The City has a total area of 

137.6 square miles: 61.7 are land and 75.9 are water. 

St. Petersburg is located on a peninsula between Tampa Bay 

and the Gulf of Mexico. It is connected to mainland Florida to 

the north and to the city of Tampa to the east by causeways 

and bridges. The Sunshine Skyway Bridge, which traverses the 

mouth of the Bay toward the south, connects St. Petersburg to 

Bradenton while the Gandy Bridge, opened in 1924, connects St. 

Petersburg to Tampa. 

Pinellas County has a population of 916,542 and together with 

Hillsborough, Hernando and Pasco counties forms the Tampa-St. 

Petersburg-Clearwater Metropolitan Statistical Area. The county 

has 587 miles of coastline and its elevation ranges from mean 

sea level to a high natural point of 110 ft. 

St. Petersburg has a humid subtropical climate, closely bordering 

a tropical savanna climate, with a rainy season from June through 

September. Pinellas County’s position on a peninsula between 

Tampa Bay and the Gulf of Mexico introduces a large amount 

of humidity into the atmosphere, which serves to moderate 

temperatures. 

Freezing temperatures and precipitation are very rare. Springs 

are short, mild and dry, and summertime weather is consistent 

with highs in the low 90s and lows in the mid 70s, accompanied 

by high humidity levels and regular afternoon thundershowers. 

Fall and winter are drier periods. 

Like the rest of the Tampa Bay area, St. Petersburg is occasionally 

affected by tropical storms and hurricanes, with the hurricane 

season extending from June through November. Many portions 

of St. Petersburg, especially along the Bay, have tropical 

microclimates, which allow for Royal Palms and coconut palms to 

grow. 

Figure 3.29 lists average climate data for St. Petersburg, FL for 

the years 1981-2010. 

Heating degree day (HDD) is a measurement designed to reflect 

the demand for energy needed to heat a building, derived from 

measurements of outside air temperature. Cooling degree day 

(CDD) is a similar measurement, reflecting the amount of energy 

needed to cool a home or business. Heating and cooling degree 

days are defined relative to a base outside temperature that 

demands no heating or cooling within a building. 

3 - 52 


CLIMATE DATA FOR ST. PETERSBURG, FL 

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual 

Max Temp (F) 

Min Temp (F) 

Avg Temp (F) 

Precipitation (in) 

Snowfall (in) 

Snow Depth (in) 

Heating Degree Days 

Cooling Degree Days 

69.2 71.6 75.4 80.2 86.1 89.3 90.4 90.2 88.5 83.5 76.8 71.3 

53.8 56.3 60.2 65.2 71.4 75.6 76.8 77.0 75.6 70.3 62.9 56.6 

61.5 64.0 67.8 72.7 78.7 82.5 83.6 83.6 82.1 76.9 69.8 64.0 

2.57 2.72 3.74 2.27 2.21 6.53 7.33 8.38 7.76 2.77 1.90 2.75 

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

0 0 0 2 25 105 143 84 40 5 0 0 

48 63 136 244 434 531 584 584 518 380 177 82 

81.0 

66.8 

73.9 

50.93 

0.0 

0.0 

406 

3781 

Figure 3.29 Weather Data Gathered Between the Years 1981-2010 for St. Petersburg, FL. 

Source: NOWData - NOAA Online Weather Data 




EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE 

The following is an inventory and discussion of existing 

infrastructure at the Pier and its environs. Figure 3.32 locates 

existing site services. Further detail and photos can be found in 

Appendix A: St. Petersburg Pier Site Observations Report, June 

27-28, 2012 (Buro Happold). 

Existing Pier 

The existing St. Petersburg Pier is scheduled for demolition due 

to well-documented structural and code compliance problems; 

however, it is necessary to document some basic features of the 

Pier since they may inform future design decisions. 

The existing St. Petersburg Pier can be broken down into two 

sections: the Pier approach and the Pier head where the Inverted 

Pyramid building is located. The Pier approach is 100 ft wide and 

extends 1380 ft to the Pier head, supporting the 2nd Avenue 

roadway to the Inverted Pyramid building. Parking is located 

on the north and south extents of the roadway with sidewalks 

located along the approach. 

The Pier approach is supported by 781 16”x16” square concrete 

piles. The western end of the Pier, at bents 1-21, is underpinned 

with sand and grout, and is retained by a bulkhead. The concrete 

bulkhead spans north-south between piles at bent 21. The 

bulkhead turns west toward the shore on the north side of the 

Pier and continues south its south side. Grout has been placed 

in various locations behind the bulkhead in conjunction with the 

bulkhead maintenance and repair program to prevent soil from 

washing out. 

The Pier head is 300 ft wide and 422 ft long. Parking extends 

around the building where a sidewalk marks the outer extent of 

this Pier section. A 245-ft wooden fishing Pier is located just off 

the eastern side of the Pier head. Approximately 24 boat slips 

are located along the western and southwestern edges of this 

section. The 1969 Ardaman & Associates report was conducted 

to make recommendations for the existing Inverted Pyramid 

building’s large caisson foundations, supporting a load of 

3,550,000 lbs. 

The Inverted Pyramid’s foundation system consists of four 

main caisson support structures. A fifth caisson was installed 

to support the entry elevator located on the west side of the 

building. As-built drawings show that each foundation structure 

has load bearing steel piles encased in a mass concrete filled 

steel sheet pile caisson. Each caisson is approximately 20-ft 

by 20-ft square in plan, and the sheet piles are embedded 

approximately 8 ft into the soil acting as a sacrificial stay-in-place 

form. 

The load bearing piles serve as the primary foundation system 

for the Inverted Pyramid. Construction of the building involved 

cutting holes in the Pier deck, installing the caissons, and tying 

the caissons to the Pier structure. The first floor of the building 

utilizes the deck of the concrete Pier constructed in the 1920s. It 

3 - 54 


is important to note that the Pier is approximately 50 years older 

than the Inverted Pyramid and associated building foundations 

(Moffatt & Nichol, 2010). Inspection of the caisson structures 

supporting the Inverted Pyramid building will be conducted to 

determine if the caissons are structurally suitable for use in the 

proposed work. Additional information is provided in Appendix 

L: City Pier Building Foundation Evaluation, March 1, 2010 

(Moffatt & Nichol). 

The landward connection of the existing Pier, from bents 1-21, 

is composed of an underpinning of sand and grout that is 

retained by a bulkhead. The grout has been placed into this 

area in conjunction with the bulkhead maintenance and repair 

program. This section of the existing Pier is scoped for selective 

demolition and its southern section will become a connection 

location for a walkway in the proposed Pier design. A thorough 

investigation of this area is recommended in order to accurately 

assess its condition and ability to meet the needs of the 

proposed design. 

Existing Bulkhead 

The bulkhead, or seawall, is in fair to good condition in the 

project area due to an ongoing inspection and repair program 

undertaken by the City on an annual basis. The bulkhead in the 

vicinity of the Pier is reportedly of “double wall” construction 

and is not supported on piles. Various grouting and bulkhead 

face repairs have taken place over the years under the north side 

of the Pier; the bulkhead runs parallel to the Pier, separating it 

from a public beach. In this area, the bulkhead is offset several 

feet from the Pier, creating a walkway (off-limits to the public) 

along the side of the Pier. 

The bulkhead makes a 90 degree turn to run under the Pier 

along bent 21, spanning the Pier pile caps--an important factor 

when devising demolition strategies for the existing Pier. 





(continued) 

Existing Water Service 

A 6” potable water main feeds the existing Pier. The water meter 

for the municipal Pier is located in the Uplands area, along with a 

series of valves, most likely backflow preventers. A 6” fire service 

main feeds the existing St. Petersburg Pier. A 4” PVC fire service 

main to the St. Petersburg Municipal Marina is located to the 

south of the existing Pier. 

Existing Drainage 

Pier 

There are 10 stormwater grates on the Pier head and 18 grates 

on the approach. All drainage grates drop into the Bay. 

Bay Shore Drive 

Along Bay Shore Drive NE, there are 36”, 30” and 12” diameter 

pipes that collect stormwater and convey it eastwards to 

4 outfalls that discharge into the Bay. Three of the outfalls 

discharge to the south of the Pier, and one discharges to the 

north. A box culvert flows north, crossing 2nd Avenue NE, and 

discharges into the Bay to the east of the intersection of Bay 

Shore Drive NE. 

Pier Access Road 

The access roadway has curb inlets approximately 60 ft. 

immediately to the east of Bay Shore Drive on 2nd Avenue NE 

that drop into 36” diameter pipe of the municipal stormwater 

collection network. Further east, along the overwater section of 

2nd Avenue NE, drainage inlets discharge directly into the Bay. 

St. Petersburg Museum of History Area 

The southern Museum lawn drains into swales that convey 

stormwater north into a retention basin area. Areas north of 

the Museum capture water in grates and convey water north in 

6” and 8” PVC pipes. These pipes discharge into MES culverts 

that then discharge into a retention basin area. The northern 

edge of the retention basin area contains a 6” underdrain, which 

along with the retention basin area overflow, feeds into a control 

structure that discharges north into a 15” RCP pipe through the 

seawall and into the Bay. A silt barrier is located on the northern 

edge of the seawall protecting the Bay. The museum area 

system drains 2.62 acres. 

Dolphin Lot North of Pier Access Road 

The northern parking system drains 4.15 acres. Stormwater 

is captured in a grate system that conveys stormwater north 

through a gravel encased 12” perforated RCP for stormwater 

storage and retention. These pipes have an overflow discharge 

into a FDOT Type “F” control structure, and then into a 15” 

RCP discharging into the Bay. A water quality swale exists at the 

northern edge of the site, and is fed by on-site runoff from the 

parking lot, but is not fed by discharging drainage pipes. 

3 - 56 


The City reports that once per year, prior to wet season, the 

inlets and control structure are cleared of all silt and debris. 

The 12” perforated pipes and the 15” RCP are flushed with 

high pressure water prior to cleaning the inlets. Before these 

operations, procedures are put in place to prevent silt from 

being flushed into the North Basin, with flushing of the pipe 

conducted back from the outfall to the control structure. 

Pelican Municipal Parking Lot No. 7 South of Pier Access Road 

In the Pelican Municipal Parking Lot (Lot #7) south of the 

access road, the existing drainage system drains 2.82 acres 

and consists of four inlets with grates. Record drawings show 

the westernmost of these inlets connected to a 24” reinforced 

concrete pipe which drains south to the Bay, but no connections 

between the other three basins and the 24” RCP. 


There is a current sewer lift station at the end of the existing Pier. 

A 6” force main runs along the Pier and continues on to 2nd 

Avenue NE westwards travelling a distance of 1400’ where it then 

discharges into a 6” gravity-fed steel cement lined pipe on 2nd 

Avenue. The sewer line continues westward, becoming a 10” 

vitrified clay pipe lined with UPVC (VCP) that connects with the 

sewer pipe on Bay Shore Drive NE at an invert level of 94.71”. 

An existing reused treated sewage effluent (TSE) line exists on 

the Uplands area. However, it is assumed that new uses for the 

proposed Pier would be minimal, making continuation of this 

service unwarranted. 

Existing Natural Gas 

The Teco Utility Company provides a 2” natural gas line to the 

Pier’s Inverted Pyramid building. A gas service valve assembly 

exists in the vicinity of the electrical panel box. 

Existing Lighting and Electrical Service 

The existing Pier is fed by a 1MVA transformer that also serves 

the existing Inverted Pyramid building. It is assumed that 

Progress Energy owns this transformer and the secondary 

voltage to be 480V. 

The lighting in the Dolphin Lot, located on the north side of 2nd 

Avenue NE, belongs to Progress Energy (PEF). The light fixture is 

Washington, manufactured by Holophane Lighting. Wattage of 

the light is 175 watt MH. If the City of St. Petersburg purchases 

these lights, they will be converted to 85 watt induction 

luminaires. The pole manufacturer is Ameron Pole Products and 

the pole style is the 22’ Victorian II. Along 2nd Avenue NE there 

is a mixture of PEF Washington lights and City “shepherd hook” 

style lights. 

In the Pelican Lot, located on the south side of 2nd Avenue 

NE, the Mongoose style light and pole fixtures are made by 

Holophane and are owned by the City. 





(continued) 

Existing Underwater Conditions 

Ardaman & Associates prepared a report, “Pier Development 

St. Petersburg, FL”, which assessed the geotechnical conditions 

and Pier substructure in 1969. From conducting standard 

penetration borings, a general soil profile was interpreted and 

found to be uniform in texture and stratification. The results of 

this investigation are discussed below in Figure 3.30 and serve as 

a general basis for infrastructure design and should be followed 

up with new investigations to provide current data required for 

final design. 

A full geotechnical exploration program will be carried out in the 

next stage of the project. The diagram Figure 3.31 shows data 

from a hydrographic survey conducted by George F. Young, Inc. 

for Moffatt & Nichol Engineers. 

Depth from Water Surface (ft) 

From 

To 

Description 

0 

11 Depth of water 

11 

12 

26 

42 

61 

12 

26 

42 

61 

83+ 

Dark gray silty sand - very loose 

Gray to light gray silty sand with brown shell - very 

loose 

Gray to brown, slightly silty very fine sand with shell 

and phosphates - very loose to medium compact 

Gray silty clay with some hard consolidation - soft 

to hard 

Light brown decomposed consolidated limerock - 

dense to very dense 

Figure 3.30 Soil Profile Data 

3 - 58 


NOTES 

1. All elevations are (-) negative unless otherwise noted. 

2. Elevations are in U.S. Survey Feet and are referenced to NAVD 88. 

3. Horizontal coordinates are Florida State Plane, West Zone, NAD 

83 (2007 adjustment), U.S. Survey Feet. 

4. Horizontal and Vertical Control is based on NOS monument 872 

6520 A. Monument is a dist set in a seawall stamped “6520 A 1978”. 

Elevation = +4.13 NAVD 88. 

5. Vessel positioning was maintained using a Trimble 5700 Dual 

Frequency Receiver, receiving corrections from Trimble’s GNSS RTN 

as co-operatively tied to the FDOT FPRN. 

6. An Odom Hydrotrac echo sounder with a 200 kHz transducer was 

used to obtain the elevations shown hereon. 

7. The information shown represents a survey performed on 6/21/12 

and can only indicate the general conditions existing on said date. 

8. Location of structures and shoreline is approximate and based on 

FDOT aerial photography. 

Figure 3.31 Hydrographic Survey 





(continued) 

LEGEND 

Gas 

Electric 

Sanitary Water 

Potable Water 

Storm Sewer Area Drains 

Storm Sewer Manhole 

Storm Water Grate Inlet 

Storm Sewer 

Storm Sewer Outlet 

SW 

... TOP 

97.00 15" S 

ALL STORMWATER 

GRATE INLETS 

ON PIER APPROACH 

AND PIER HEAD 

DROP INTO BAY 

6" CIP 

4" CIP 

CB II 

102.31 TH 

(.....) 

..... N 24'' 

CB II 

102.28 TH 

97.83 S 30" 

99.08 NE 18" 

8" VCP 8" VCP 

10" VCP 

SW 

10" VCP 

8" CIP 

SW 

(1082-1) 

96.45 30" W 

E2-30 

65 DIST 

102.8 RIM 

94.92 W-E 

2.5" PVC 

CB I 

102.12 TH 

..... N-S 

BC 8' x 4' 

SW 

SW 

102.78 TOP 

(MFS 7/76) 

96.35 36" SE 

BC 8' x 4' 

PRIVATE 

CB II 

99.9 TH 

(FB 895 PG 22) 

..... N-S-W 

2" PVC 

E2-35 

50 DIST 

102.9 RIM 

94.98 W-E 

1.5" PVC 

10" VCP 

1" PVC 

MISC #811 

10" VCP 

4" VCP 

D2-40 

381 DIST 

102.6 RIM 

96.20 

1" PVC 

GI 

... TOP 

(6393-1) 

99.00 15" N 

4" Fire Service to 

ST PETE MUNICIPAL MARINA 

1.5" PVC 

6" CIP 

2.5" PVC 

6" VCP 6" VCP 

2" PVC 1.5" PVC 

6" CIP 6" CIP 

6" CIP 

6" CIP 

MASTER METER FOR 

MUNICIPAL PIER 

8" DIP 

369 DIST 

4.00 DEPTH 

6” POTABLE WATER MAIN 

6” FIRE SERVICE MAIN 

6” SANITARY FORCE MAIN 

3” GAS MAIN 

6" DIP 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.41 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.38 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.23 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.24 

1000KVA 

480V 

TRANSFORMER 

4" VCP 

4" VCP 

6" CIP 

6" DIP 

6" VCP 

6" VCP 

4" VCP 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.27 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.29 

SANITARY LIFT STATION 

4" VCP 

4" VCP 4" VCP 

4" VCP 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.35 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.33 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.25 

GI 

... TOP 

(6739-1) 

104.30 

1.25" PVC 1.5" PVC 2" PVC 

1.5" PVC 

1.25" PVC 

4" PVC 

2" PVC 

1.5" PVC 

1.5" PVC 

Figure 3.32 Existing Site Services Plan 

3 - 60 


ARCHITECTURAL CRITERIA 

The new Pier is expected to be a new landmark for the City 

of St. Petersburg, the region of Tampa Bay and Florida. It is 

intended as an icon, a representation of the City, the ambitions 

of its people, and its relationship to the Bay. It is also intended 

to be an observatory, a Lens both back to the City and onto the 

Bay itself that frames the City’s inextricable link to the water, 

enhancing the residents’ view of their present and future. 

As it is intended to be a flexible and functional resource for 

the community for the next 75 years, it should be planned and 

designed with the principles of quality, durability, flexibility and 

operational sustainability. The Pier shall be designed to meet the 

criteria for a 100-year return period design storm event. 

Key Concepts 

The following are key concepts to be implemented in the design 

of the new Pier, as presented in the Pier Advisory Task Force 

Report, which appears as Appendix H of this document: 

• Proximity to and integration into the existing urban 

fabric and waterfront 

• The creation of comfortable and attractive pedestrian 

walkways and pathways 

• Optimizing accessibility by way of trolleys and public 

transportation 

• Program should begin directly at the main entry of the 

Pier 

• The new Pier should function as a “destination” 

• The new Pier should be “one of a kind and unique” 

relative to its adjacent surroundings 

• Short walking distances between attractions 

• The new Pier should be attractive to both locals and 

visitors in order for revenue generating activity to flourish 

• Preservation of views to and from the City and Bay 

• Energy efficiency 

• Enhanced accessibility for persons with disabilities 





(continued) 

Sustainable Planning and Design 

The principal goal of sustainable design is that new 

developments only use the amount of energy absolutely 

necessary in an effort to reduce the depletion of natural 

resources. Sustainable design, performed correctly, should pay 

equal weight to the people, the environment, and cost, in order 

to create the optimum building for the present and the future. 

The basic goals of sustainable design are: 

• To design energy efficient buildings and systems to 

reduce energy use 

• To use recycled materials and reduce energy 

consumption to minimize one’s impact on the 

environment 

• To improve the indoor quality of life for the better health 

and well-being of occupants 

Achieving these goals can provide the following benefits: 

• Reduce energy and operating costs 

• Reduce the impact on the environment 

• Promote good health and increase productivity 

• Create a positive public image 

A sustainable ethos permeates the new Pier. While the project 

is not currently seeking LEED Certification, its goals are based 

on LEED Silver standards, and are encompassed by five major 

categories: Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and 

Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, Indoor Environmental 

Quality. 

Beyond the simple use of sustainable materials, the project 

seeks to minimize environmental impact throughout the building 

process from initial project mobilization to the reuse and 

recycling of demolished components. Sourcing as much material 

locally as possible will be an elemental part of the building 

process. In order to create a successful project for the City of St. 

Petersburg, these strategies will not be considered as “add-ons” 

or “special features,” but rather as integrated components of 

the overall design process. Durable, environmentally preferable 

products will be specified including certified wood, post 

industrial and post consumer recycled materials, concrete with fly 

ash and low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) materials. 

In addition, the Lens Canopy is designed to potentially 

accommodate an array of photovoltaic panels on its north side 

and wind turbines on its south side, as described in Figure 3.33. 

These renewable technologies would be capable of generating 

energy for the project from the wind and sun. The tilt of the 

Canopy can improve the efficiency of the solar panels while the 

turbines can benefit from the windy environment of the Bay. 

3 - 62 


PV PANELS 

WIND TURBINES 

Figure 3.33 Potential Photovoltaic Panel and Wind Turbine Array 

Figure 3.34 Potential Sustainable Lens Features: Examples of Photovoltaic Panels 




Through the integration of a bicycle and recreation path, the 

design of the new Pier emphasizes active lifestyles by engaging 

with the existing community of physically active city dwellers and 

the growing community of cyclists. 

The multiple approaches taken by the A/E team with respect 

to sustainable principles can provide a permanent, adaptive 

platform that supports the site and the City’s health and 

longevity, not only in terms of energy, water and ecology, but 

for the life and culture that emerges as a result of this resilient 

system. 

Building Massing 

The new Pier’s massing will be conditioned by a complex range 

of factors, including, but not limited to: 

• Programmatic functions 

• Integration within existing context 

• Site orientation 

• Outdoor space 

• Relationship to the Uplands 

• Boating 

• Urban fabric 

• Views 

• Relationship to water 

• Shading 

• Accessibility 

• Circulation 

• FAA height limitations 

3 - 64 


Figure 3.35 Potential Sustainable Lens Features: Examples of Small Scale Wind Turbines 





(continued) 

Albert Whitted Airport Flight Path Study 

The proximity of Albert Whitted Airport to the south of the 

St. Petersburg Pier defines a number of height restrictions for 

the project. These are described on pages 3-32 thru 35 of this 

document. Figure 3.36 illustrates the relationship between 

the Pier and the airport’s two runways. While the southwestnortheast 

flight path does not interfere with the Pier, the northsouth 

flight path overlaps with the east-west axis of the Pier. 

Though the heights of all structures to be erected in this zone 

of interference are below the limits established by the Federal 

Aviation Administration Regulations, the A/E team has studied 

the reflection of the sun on the Canopy in order to understand 

the effects of glare on planes descending towards the runway 

from the north. 

Figure 3.37 delineates the effects of the sun at midday, the only 

time at which the sun’s position relative to the Canopy aligns 

with the north-south flight path. During both summer and winter, 

it has been determined that the angle of the sun’s reflection 

will not interfere with the pilot’s viewing range upon landing. 

However, as the design develops, the A/E will conduct ongoing 

studies in order to minimize any possibility of visual interference. 

Additionally, portions of the Canopy will be treated with an antiglare 

protector. 

3 - 66 


North-South 

Flight Path 

Possible Sun 

Reflection Conflict 

Southwest-Northeast 

Flight Path 

No Sun Reflection 

Conflict 

Figure 3.36 Albert Whitted Airport Flight Paths 

PILOT’S 

VIEWING 

ANGLE 

NORTH - SOUTH FLIGHT PATH 

Figure 3.37 Midday Sun Reflection Study Along North-South Flight Path 

Winter Sun 

38° 

Summer Sun 

86° 





(continued) 

Shading Study 

Figures 3.38 and 3.39 illustrate shadow studies completed for 

the new Pier during summer and winter solstices. The Canopy 

has been designed to maximize shade in the summer to 

protect visitors from the harsh sunlight and to create a pleasant 

environment for waterfront activities. In the summertime, the 

Promontory and areas covered by the Canopy are sheltered from 

the sun for a majority of the daytime. 

Materials and Finishes 

Materials for the project shall be chosen to provide a long 

service life and performance consistent with the design 

requirements and to provide adequate structural capacity to 

support the anticipated loads for this type of facility. In general, 

concrete is highly durable in a marine environment. Where 

steel is used, consideration shall be taken as to whether to use 

stainless steel, hot-dipped galvanizing, epoxy coatings and/or 

some type of cathodic protection system. 

Material used in the Pier structure shall meet the following 

criteria: 

• Steel pipe shall be to ASTM A 501 and A 53 

• Structural steel shall be as follows: 

1. Rolled sections, plates and angles: ASTM A 36, 

ASTM A 572 and or ASTM A 992 

2. Hollow structural sections: ASTM A 500, Grade B 

• Coating system for structural steel: zinc-coated or 

galvanized by the hot-dipped process in accordance 

with the requirements of ASTM A 123 and/or A 153 as 

applicable, after fabrication 

• Structural bolts, nuts and washers: ASME/ANSI B 18.2.2 

and ASTM A 325 

• Anchor bolts: ASTM A 307, A 449, or ASTM F 1554 

• Marine concrete: 5,500 psi minimum at 28 days FDOT 

Class IV Portland cement concrete with calcium nitrate 

for superstructure and silica fume for substructure for 

an extremely aggressive environment with a maximum 

water cement ratio of 0.40 

• Reinforcing steel: ASTM A 615, A 616, A 617 and A 706 

as applicable 

• Stainless steel: ASTM Type 316L stainless 

• Electrical and lighting equipment shall be NEMA rated 

A number of materials were considered for the Canopy: precast 

concrete panels, lightweight concrete panels and aluminum 

panels. The table Figure 3.40 summarizes these materials’ 

attributes. Due to their optimum balance of cost, performance 

and architectural qualities, aluminum panels were concluded to 

be the most appropriate at this stage in the design process. 

3 - 68 


Summer 8am 

Summer 2pm 

Summer 10am 

Summer 4pm 

Figure 3.38 Summer Shading Study 

Summer 12pm 

Summer 6pm 

Winter 8am 

Winter 2pm 

Winter 10am 

Winter 4pm 

Figure 3.39 Winter Shading Study 

Winter 12pm 

Winter 6pm 





(continued) 

Canopy Materials 

Over the course of the BOD phase, the design team looked 

at several options for the material of the Canopy, taking into 

consideration life cycle and maintenance cost, initial material 

cost, constructability, and visual impact upon completion and 

long term. The material understood by the team to best meet 

these criteria is 5086 Aluminum Alloy with a high grade coating. 

This alloy has very good corrosive resistance in harsh seawater 

environments and is typically used in boat building and other 

constructions near or on water. A Kynar 500 base coating with 

a minimum 20 year, as much as 30 year warranty allows for a 

long serviceability life span. The following attributes render this 

material appropriate for the construction of the Canopy: 

• Fits the current budget goals while maximizing the 

Canopy’s iconic look 

• Good strength to weight ratio, minimizing the impact of 

foundations 

• Panels are easily erected, replaced, or modified 

• Self-cleaning and not susceptible to algae, mold, or 

staining 

• Long-term color consistency, regardless of exposure to 

the sun and elements 

As the team moves into the next phases of the project, 

large scale performance mock-ups are being planned in 

order to continue to explore the constructability, life cycle 

and maintenance, and aesthetic criteria that must be met. 

At this juncture the aluminum panels are anticipated to be 

approximately 30 sq. ft. in size and attached to a galvanized 

sub structure, which is in turn attached to a galvanized super 

structure producing a compatable assembly system. 

3 - 70 


Figure 3.40 Example of Metal Panels on a Metal Frame Sub Structure 





(continued) 

Ipe Specification Data 

Ipe (also known as Ironwood) is often referred to as one of the 

hardest woods known to man and will outlast most all other 

decking products on the market. Its resilient properties are 

complemented by a rich and warm appearance. 

Family Name 

Tabebuia avellandedae, Tabebuia ipe and Tabebuia serratifolia 

of the Family Bignoniaceae. 

Common Names 

Ipe, pau d’arco, ipe tabaco, bethabara, lapacho, ebene vert, 

amata prieto, ironwood, greenheart, amapa, cortez, guayacan, 

guayacan polvillo, flor amarillo, madera negra, tahuari, lapacho 

negro, Brazilian Walnut. 

Height/Weight 

Trees routinely grow to 150 ft., and can reach 200 ft., with trunk 

diameters of 6 ft. and boles clear to 60 ft. or more. Weight varies 

between 60 and 75 lbs/cu. ft. with a specific gravity of 1.08. 

Properties 

Air dries rapidly with very slight checking or warping. Highly 

resistant to insect and fungal attacks. Exceeds ADA requirements 

for Static Coefficient of friction in a wet environment. 

Dimensional Stability 

Stable, minimal checking and warping 

Maintenance 

Low 

Fire Rating (NFPA) 

Class A 

Service Life 

Over 40 years 

Movement In Service 

Low 

Bending Strength (PSI) 

26,000 

Modulus Of Elasticity (PSI) 

3,308,000 

Hardness (PSI) 

3,650 

3 - 72 


Figure 3.41 Example of Ipe Boardwalk 





(continued) 

Pier Access 

The St. Petersburg Pier presents a range of entry conditions 

accommodating staff and visitors, including: 

• Welcome Mat 

• Hub 

• Overwater Bridge 

• Overwater Drive 

• Promontory 

The Pier will include access points for support functions such as 

shipping and receiving of supplies and materials: 

• Hub 

• Marina 

• Promontory 

There will be adequate vehicular access from an improved street, 

the design of which will be approved by the City’s Engineering 

and Transportation and Parking Management Departments. 

All areas of the building and site must conform to codes 

and regulations with respect to accessibility, specifically the 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Florida Building 

Code, which impact the design of building elements such as: 

• Circulation routes, both interior and exterior 

• Parking 

• Entrances and doors 

• Ramps and stairs 

• Restroom facilities 

• Drinking fountains 

• Emergency alarm systems 

• Signage 

The new Pier will expand existing site access routes, with the 

BlueWays Trail running through the Lens Marina (providing 

kayakers and canoers many amenities), and the Downtown 

Looper Central Avenue Trolley stopping at the Welcome Mat. 

An open-air electric tram is being considered as the means of 

transportation to the end of the new Pier. Figure 3.42 describes 

these improved access routes. 

As a general guideline highlighted in the Vision/Guiding 

Principles and Context for the Preparation of a Downtown 

Waterfront Master Plan (Appendix I), public access to the 

downtown waterfront will be prioritized in the following 

hierarchy: pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit and motorized 

vehicles. Garbage pickup will occur at the location of the existing 

dumpster west of the Pelican Lot; garbage truck access for the 

Overwater Bridge will not be needed. Small service vehicles will 

bring trash from the new Pier to the dumpsters. 

3 - 74 


Promontory 

Lens 

Marina 

Welcome 

Mat 

Pier Trolley 

Central Avenue Shuttle 

Downtown Looper 

BlueWays Trail 

Figure 3.42 Improved Pier Access Plan 





(continued) 

Pier Trolley Implementation 

The Pier Trolley provides free transportation between the 

Dolphin and Pelican Lots and the St. Petersburg Pier. This 

program is administered by the St. Petersburg Downtown 

Partnership in cooperation with the City of St. Petersburg and 

the Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority. 

Figure 3.43 describes the Pier Trolley circuit for the new Pier. 

The trolley is expected to complete a circuit from the Pelican 

and Dolphin Parking Lots to the Promontory and back in 

approximately 15 minutes. 

The development of the new Pier provides the opportunity to 

introduce more ecologically sensitive transportation, such as 

electric or solar trolley, with possibly more seating and ease of 

accessibility. 

3 - 76 


CONNECTION 

TO THE SHOPS 

AT ST. PETE 

1 

PARKING 

GARAGE 

2 

BEACH 

DRIVE 

7 

2ND AVENUE NE 

DOLPHIN 

PARKING 

SPA 

BEACH 

PELICAN 

PARKING 

6 

3 

WELCOME 

MAT 

HUB 

1 

2 min 

LENS 

MARINA 

4 

Connection to The Shops at 

St. Pete 

PROMONTORY 

5 

CENTRAL YACHT 

BASIN MARINA 

3 min 

2 

Beach Drive 

3 

Welcome Mat, Hub & Spa Beach 

2 min 

3 min 

4 

Lens Marina 

1 min 

5 

Promontory 

2 min 

6 

Welcome Mat, Hub & Spa Beach 

2 min 

7 

Dolphin Parking / 

Central Yacht Basin Marina 

Figure 3.43 Pier Trolley Circuit 





(continued) 

Parking Facilities 

The existing Pier head lot holds 22 car parking spaces and 

the Pier approach is the site of 4 loading spaces, 25 reserved 

valet car parking spaces and 44 metered car parking spaces. 

These existing spaces will be eliminated. Onsite parking will be 

provided via existing parking lots located on the Uplands. To 

the north of 2nd Avenue NE, the Dolphin Lot, which is currently 

the site of 312 car parking spaces and 6 bus spaces. There is a 

possibility of increasing the number of parking spaces to 360 

through a reconfiguration and restriping of existing spaces. 

While it is currently the site of 250 car parking spaces, the 

modified Pelican Lot, south of 2nd Avenue NE on the Uplands 

will accommodate up to 157 vehicles directly adjacent to the 

new Hub program component. 

The following parking spaces may be required on site: 

• Persons with disabilities 

• Ambulance/police/emergency vehicles 

• Delivery vehicles 

• Trash collection vehicles 

• Administration visitors 

• Bicycles 

• Tours and school buses 

• Periodic requirement: contractors, food trucks, etc. 

Accommodations will be made at the Welcome Mat for 

accessible parking as required by code. Observations have 

concluded that all parking spaces are filled during peak event 

activity, but do not fill during normal weekly peak Pier activities. 

The new Pier will reduce the demand for parking spaces 

associated with commercial and retail uses. Figure 3.44 describes 

the modified parking configuration for the new Pier. 

Signage and Wayfinding 

The new Pier will be equipped with extensive signage and 

wayfinding amenities. Site and building directories, signage, 

and informational devices shall be designed for easy access by 

persons with disabilities. All signage must comply with current 

regulations and guidelines published by recognized accessibility 

advocate groups. 

3 - 78 


Parking Location 

Existing 

Proposed 

Pier Head 22 N/A 

DOLPHIN PARKING 

312 SPACES 

Pier Approach 

Dolphin Parking Lot 

Pelican Parking Lot 

TOTAL 

69 N/A 

312 312 

250 157 

653 469 

PELICAN PARKING 

157 SPACES 

Figure 3.44 Modified Parking for the New Pier 





(continued) 

Public Amenities 

The following are public amenities anticipated to be included in 

the project. 

The Hub / Welcome Mat 

• Restrooms & changing stations 


• Infrastructure for special events 

• Beach access 

Overwater Drive 

• Shade canopies 


• Seating 

Marina 



• Seating 

Promontory 



• Concessions shop 

• Seating 

Overwater Bridge 


Revenue Generating Amenities 

The following are opportunities for private sector, revenuegenerating 

amenities that are not built-out within the $50 million 

project. All utility and stub-outs are however included in the 

project: 

The Hub / Welcome Mat 

• Bayside dining 

• Retail/concessions 

Marina 

• Concessions stand 

• Bait shop 

• Kayak & passive watercraft rental 

Promontory 

• Bayside grill 

3 - 80 


Lighting Systems 

The lighting design will support the diverse nature of the Pier’s 

functions while seamlessly integrating with the architecture. The 

lighting design, encompassing both natural daylight and electric 

light sources, will place its primary focus on the recreational 

aspect of the site. The lighting will serve as a motif to guide the 

visitor, reinforcing movement and wayfinding. 

Energy-efficient LED lighting will be prioritized in the majority of 

the project’s lighting systems. 

The new Pier shall feature fully code compliant lighting, 

including emergency and FCAA lighting. In addition to code 

lighting, architectural lighting shall be provided in the following 

locations: 

Hub and Welcome Mat 

High level pole lighting and low level bollard lighting will provide 

inviting retail lighting at the Hub while encouraging nighttime 

activity and events at the Welcome Mat, with a sensitivity to 

overspill into the water, which can affect sea life. 


Low level bollard type fixtures rendering the Overwater Bridge as 

a strip of light without overspill into the surrounding water. 


High level lighting will be focused primarily on the Overwater 

Drive’s area of activity, echoing the bridge, as bright single strip 

of light. 

Marina 

Low level fixtures will enhance and emphasize the shape of the 

Underwater Feature, while providing the necessary light for 

Marina activities. 

Promontory 

General lighting will prioritize way-finding, while architectural 

lighting will create zones of more intense light to attract visitors 

to areas of interest and activity. 

Lens Canopy 

Nighttime lighting will transform a visitor’s experience of the 

space, allowing the underside of the canopy to function as the 

backdrop for events and activities. Lighting will allow the top 

of the Canopy to be visible from the Uplands while offering 

opportunities for light shows, movies, or a softly lit space. 


Lighting emphasizing the existing piles, from the mud line upwards, 

will create both an attraction for sea life and a spectacle 

for visitors. 





(continued) 


In addition to functioning as a new icon for the City of St. 

Petersburg, the Lens is intended to function as a new space for 

collective experiences. The new Pier expands on the existing 

Pier’s activities with programming activities are targeted towards 

persons of all age groups and interests. Though by no means 

exhaustive, the following is a list of possible activities at the new 

Pier: 

• buy a coffee, a cold soda, a hamburger, french fries or a 

beer 

• watch live entertainment and dance 

• rent a kayak, canoe or pedal boat at the Marina 

• ride an elevator to elevated viewing platforms and 

balconies and watch the sunrise over Tampa Bay or the 

sunset over downtown 

• buy bait, fish at the Promontory or the north-east side of 

the Marina, and feed the pelicans 

• dine at a water’s edge restaurant 

• rent a pedicycle or ride a bike 

• experience a variety of educational opportunities at the 

Promontory and the Learning Steps 

• watch an underwater light show in the center of the Lens 

• use the 18,000 sq. ft. of shaded gathering space for a 

party or community event. 

• surf the internet via WiFi 

• purchase a souvenir 

• rest in the shade on public benches, tables and chairs 

• use a public toilet at the Hub, the Marina or the 

Promontory 

• park your car at the Pelican or Dolphin Lot and catch a 

trolley out to the end of the Pier 

• experience 360° views from all areas on the Pier 

• enjoy extensive shaded walkways 

• drink from public water fountains 

3 - 82 


Figure 3.45 Pier Activities 




ENGINEERING CRITERIA 

General Technical Specifications 

The project will be governed by many codes and standards as 

outlined below. The project shall have a design life of 75 years. 

The new Pier shall be categorized as a Risk Category II structure. 

Marine Engineering Criteria 

The proposed Pier will be a pile supported structure designed 

to support loads similar to those of the existing Pier. In the 

proposed design the Overwater Bridge, an elevated walkway 

loop that travels from the south at the landward side to the north 

end of the Lens, will be supported by 4’-0” diameter concrete 

caissons at 100 ft. o.c. The Overwater Drive, an elevated roadway 

loop that travels from the north at the landward side to the south 

at the south end of the Lens will be supported by (3) 18”x18” 

precast concrete piles at each pile bent, with pile bents at 60 

ft. o.c. The outside piles at each bent will have an opposing 15° 

batter to resist lateral forces. Although loading for the new Pier 

is similar to the existing Pier, investigations must be conducted 

to ensure that final pile selection and layout will be capable 

of supporting the structure. After analyzing the soil, final pile 

embedment can be determined for the required vertical and 

lateral loading that each pile will be required to resist. 

Marine engineering codes governing the project include: 

• Florida Building Code (2010) – Chapter 18 (soils and 

foundations) and 31 (marine structures) 

• FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge 

Construction 

• AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 6th Edition 

(2012) 

• City of Saint Petersburg Engineering Design Standards 

• City of Saint Petersburg Codes and Ordinances 

• OSHA Regulations 

• Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) – Design of Pier and 

Wharf Structures 

• Design of Pier and Wharf Structures – Unified Facilities 

Criteria (UFC) 

• Standard for the Construction and Fire Protection of 

Marine Terminals, Piers, and Wharves – NFPA 307 

The Florida Building Code stipulates that structures seaward of 

a coastal construction control line (CCCL) need to respond to 

requirements for erosion, scour and loads of a 100-year storm 

event including wind, wave, hydrostatic and hydrodynamic 

forces acting simultaneously with dead and live loads. These 

requirements also indicate that all habitable major structures be 

elevated and anchored to an adequate pile foundation. 

3 - 84 


Although fishing piers are not considered to be a habitable 

major structure, their function is for human use. Chapter 62B- 

33, Florida Administrative Code (Rules and Procedures for 

Coastal Construction and Excavation) has specifically identified 

the minimum design storm event for pier construction. Rule 

62B-33.007 (4) (k), Florida Administrative Code, states “Fishing 

or ocean piers or the extension of existing fishing or ocean 

piers shall be designed to withstand at a minimum the erosion, 

scour and loads accompanying a twenty (20)-year storm event. 

Pier decking and rails may be designed to be an expendable 

structure. Major structures constructed on the Pier shall be 

designed for the wind loads as set forth in the Florida Building 

Code. Pile foundations shall not obstruct the longshore sediment 

transport and shall be designed to minimize any impact to the 

shoreline or coastal processes.” 

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) 

requires permits for construction seaward of the coastal 

construction control line and 50 ft. setback. The General Criteria 

for a coastal construction control line is described in the Florida 

State DEP 2012 Rules and Procedures for Coastal Construction 

and Excavation. “The beach and dune system is an integral part 

of the coastal system and represents one of the most valuable 

natural resources in Florida, providing protection to adjacent 

Uplands properties, recreational areas and habitat for wildlife. 

A coastal construction control line is intended to define that 

portion of the beach and dune system which is subject to severe 

fluctuations caused by a 100-year storm surge, storm waves, or 

other forces such as wind, wave, or water level changes. These 

fluctuations are a necessary part of the natural functioning of 

the coastal system and are essential to post-storm recovery, 

long term stability and the preservation of the beach and dune 

system. However, imprudent human activities can adversely 

interfere with these natural processes and alter the integrity and 

functioning of the beach and dune system. The control line and 

50 ft. setback call attention to the special hazards and impacts 

associated with the use of such property, but do not preclude all 

development or alteration of coastal property seaward of such 

lines.” 





(continued) 

Foundation Selection and Design 

The piles that will support the new Pier must be engineered to 

withstand not only the dead and live loads of the Pier, but also 

the loads from hurricane winds, breaking waves, and lateral 

currents. There are several pile type options that can be used to 

form the foundation of the Pier. Although not recommended, 

reuse of existing piles is a possibility after a thorough inspection 

of their current condition is completed. Driving new piles is 

another option as well. Additional information related to the 

existing piles and other engineering concerns that was discussed 

in a meeting concerning general site conditions can be found in 

Appendix D: General Site Conditions Meeting Minutes, June 27, 

2012 (McLaren Engineering Group). 

New piles can be made of steel, timber, or prestressed concrete. 

Each material option has its advantages and an analysis weighing 

function with cost is necessary to determine the optimal material 

for final design. A preliminary analysis of foundation types 

follows: 

Existing Piles 

Reusing the existing piles is not recommended. The existing 

piles are approximately 90 years old and, in many cases, have 

been condemned, driving the decision to demolish the existing 

Pier. The location and orientation of the existing piles in relation 

to the intersecting new Pier would also be a limitation. However, 

the existing caissons under the Inverted Pyramid building have 

potential for reuse to support the offshore components of the 

new Pier. 

New Steel Piles 

Steel piles are generally either pipe piles or rolled steel 

H-section piles. Using steel as a pile material has the advantage 

of being easy to handle with respect to cutoff and extension to 

the desired length during installation. They have a high loadcarrying 

capacity and can penetrate hard layers such as dense 

gravel and soft rock. However, they are relatively costly and are 

subject to corrosion. Due to the corrosive nature of a coastal 

environment, epoxy coatings must be applied to resist the 

effects of salt water. 

Prestressed Concrete Piles 

Concrete piles are reinforced to resist the bending moment 

developed during pickup and transportation, the vertical load 

and the bending moment caused by a lateral load. They can be 

subject to hard driving, can be easily combined with a concrete 

superstructure and are corrosion resistant. However, they can 

be difficult to transport in some locations and achieving proper 

cutoff during installation may be difficult. Despite this, concrete 

piles may be the best option as concrete is resilient in coastal 

environments and is not affected by marine borers. 

3 - 86 


Concrete Caissons 

Concrete caissons are reinforced to resist the required vertical 

load and the bending moment caused by a lateral load. In this 

application, the caisson would act like a large concrete pile. A 

hole would be bored to the desired depth and a sacrificial spiral 

weld pipe form would be sunk into the hole. The caisson would 

be open to the bottom. A reinforcement cage would be lowered 

into the pipe form and the form would be filled with concrete. 

The spiral weld pipe form would remain in place. The caisson 

can be easily combined with a concrete superstructure and the 

concrete portion of the caisson is corrosion resistant. An epoxy 

coating can be applied to the sacrificial pipe form if desired for 

cosmetic reasons. Using pipe as a form has the advantage of 

being easy to handle with respect to cutoff and extension to the 

desired length during installation. A concrete caisson may be 

the best option for the walkway support as concrete is resilient in 

coastal environments and is not affected by marine borers. 

Pile Caps 

Pile caps evenly distribute the concentrated loads from 

the superstructure of the Pier to the supporting pile group. 

Orienting the caps transverse to the length of the Pier provides 

improved lateral stiffness for environmental forces experienced 

during hurricane and tropical storm events. A precast concrete 

pile cap at the walkway caissons would expedite construction. 

An oversized recess in the pile cap would slip over the top of the 

caisson and be grouted in place. A formed and pored pile cap at 

the roadway piles would be desired over a precast pile cap. The 

batter piles at the roadway bents would complicate alignment of 

the pile tops with a recess. 





(continued) 

Wind and Wave Load Criteria 

Wind loads for the new Pier shall be calculated based on ASCE 

7-10 standard utilizing Risk Category II and Exposure D. This 

results in a maximum wind load of 141 psf at the top of the 

Canopy and 127 psf at the lower, more horizontal sections. 

Due to the unique shape and response characteristics of the 

structure, wind tunnel analysis will be required to determine the 

wind pressure more accurately. Analysis of wind direction and 

speed is necessary to determine dominant wind-generated wave 

heights and direction. Moffatt & Nichol provided an Extreme 

Value Analysis of historical wind speeds at MacDill Air Force Base 

from 1941 through 2011 in their report entitled ‘St. Petersburg 

Pier Design Competition Metocean and Structural Concept 

Level Design Basis’. It was reported that the majority of wind 

comes from the east-north east with winds in excess of 30 mph 

occurring in some instance in all directions. This is attributable to 

the passing of hurricane or tropical storm events. Return periods 

for the 25, 50 and 100-year events found 10 minute wind speeds 

of 74, 83 and 92 mph, respectively. However, these values did not 

take into account wind direction and therefore the recurrence of 

directional extreme winds should be analyzed for final design. 

Waves found in Tampa Bay are either locally generated wind 

waves or offshore swells that enter the Bay from the inlets 

between Mullet, Egmont, Passage, and School Keys. Locally 

generated wind waves are the dominant waves that are expected 

to be found at the proposed Pier location. Design wave heights 

shall be calculated to include storm surge as this will occur 

during significant storm events. 

Storm Load Criteria 

The Pier approach and Pier head are located in a Coastal High 

Hazard Area and designated a Velocity Zone (VE). The BFE is at 8 

ft. The Pier is located in a VE-8 flood zone. 

June through November is hurricane season in the Atlantic 

Ocean and Caribbean Sea with the majority of hurricane activity 

occurring between August and October. Tampa Bay experiences 

effects of passing storms, although it is uncommon for the area 

to receive a direct hit. The effect of these passing storms typically 

result with high winds, increased wave heights, flooding due to 

storm surge and increased cross-shore sediment transportation 

rates. The 25 October 1921 “Tarpon Springs” storm was the last 

major hurricane to directly hit the St. Petersburg area with wind 

speeds of approximately 115 mph at landfall. 

Hurricanes and tropical storms consist of large wind fields 

driven by pressure gradients from a central low pressure and 

temperature gradients in the atmosphere. The winds from these 

events create storm surges by blowing the ocean water up 

against the coastline. Flooding results from a combination of a 

storm or tidal surge and high river stages from heavy rain. The 

severity of flooding is dependent upon the intensity of the storm 

event and its duration. 

3 - 88 


Forces due to wind, waves and storm surge will directly impact 

the proposed Pier as it is located within the near-shore and surf 

zone areas. Longshore and cross-shore sediment transports 

are natural processes that occur at the project location. During 

storm events, cross-shore sediment transport rates are dominant, 

resulting in erosion as sand is deposited to offshore sandbars. 

The effects of this on the Pier takes the form of scouring around 

the piles, with piles within the surf and swash zones being the 

most affected. 

The Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) 

P-55, Coastal Construction Manual, gives guidance on the 

construction of residences in coastal areas. Though information 

pertaining directly to the design requirements of fishing piers 

is not provided, the content of the Manual focusing on pile 

foundation design and the effects of erosion and debris impact 

during storm events may be used in the design of the pile 

substructure. In general, the methods used to determine base 

flood elevations, wave heights and wave crest elevation, wave 

run-up, localized storm erosion and impact loads can be used 

to determine conservative values for schematic design. These 

are found in Chapter 3 “Identifying Hazards” and Chapter 8 

“Determining Site-Specific Loads”. Determination of site-specific 

wave loads will be determined during the next stage of project 

development. 

Structural Criteria 

Structural engineering codes governing the project include: 

• Florida Building Code (2010) – Chapter 16 – Structural 

Design 


Construction 

• City of St. Petersburg Engineering Design Standards 

• City of St. Petersburg Codes and Ordinances 

• AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 6th Edition 

(2012) 

• AASHTO LRFD Guide Specifications for Design Of 

Pedestrian Bridges, 2nd Edition (2009) 

• FAA Height Restrictions for Albert Whitted Municipal 

Airport 

• OSHA Regulations 

• AISC – Design of Steel Structures 

• ACI – Design of Concrete Structures 

• Precast Concrete Institute Bridge Design Manual 





(continued) 

Dimension and Loadings 

Referred to as the Overwater Drive, the lower loop of the new Pier, 

traveling from the north at the landward side to the south side of 

the Lens is a wider roadway intended for mixed vehicular traffic 

and pedestrian use. The 12 ft. lane is to be used for emergency 

vehicle and fire truck access only. The 8 ft. lane is intended to be 

used by pedestrians. A turn-around area at the end of the Pier 

with a 35 ft. radius allows vehicles to return to shore. All turning 

radii and other key dimensions will follow AASHTO standards, but 

will use low travel speeds that are associated with this facility. Key 

dimensions are as follows: 

Canopy 

The Canopy will be subject principally to the wind loads as 

identified above. A 20 psf live load will be used, though this may 

be reduced by refinements based on ASCE7 Section 4.9.1. 


• 20 ft. clear width between railings 

• The overall Drive shall be designed to HS-20 loading to 

accommodate 3 axle/49,000 lb vehicles 

• Vehicle access on the Overwater Drive shall be restricted 

to the public trolley and service and emergency vehicles. 

• Vehicle access and pedestrian walkways shall be separated 

by a change in material, surface markings, or a physical 

barrier (permanent and/or removable) 

• Curbs shall not be used as a form of separation between 

vehicle and pedestrian walkways 

• During special events, the vehicle lane shall be kept clear 

to allow trolley and emergency vehicle access 

• A superimposed deadload (SDL) of 2 to 5 psf will be used 

• Bridge expansion joints will be placed to account for 

AASHTO-proscribed temperature fluctuations 


• 10 ft. clear width between railings 

• Designed for 100 lbs/sq. ft. 

• Pedestrian access only 

• A superimposed deadload (SDL) of 2 to 5 psf will be used 

• Bridge expansion joints will be placed to account for 

AASHTO-proscribed temperature fluctuations 

Clear Heights 

• The clear height between the Overwater Bridge and the 

Overwater Drive will be 13’-6” 

• The clear height between the Overwater Drive and 

Canopy will be 13’-6” 

3 - 90 


Railings 

• All railings will be a minimum of 42” in height 

• Railings along the Overwater Bridge and Drive will be 

considered pedestrian and will be designed to code 

standard 

• Railings at the Overwater Bridge and Bike Path will be 52” 

in height 

Ramps 

• All pedestrian ramps will be ADA compliant 





(continued) 

Clearances 

The minimum vertical, horizontal and regulatory clearance 

requirements for bridges shall conform to the requirements 

shown in the FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) Plans 

Preparation, Manual Volume 1, Section 2.10. 

Vertical Clearances 

1. The vertical clearance of bridges over water is the minimum 

distance between the underside of the superstructure and 

the normal high water (NHW) for navigable water crossings 

or the mean high water (MHW) for coastal crossings. See 

PPM, Volume 1, Section 2.10 and the FDOT Drainage 

Manual Section 4.6 for vertical clearance requirements over 

water. When applicable, vertical clearance is measured at the 

inside face of the fender system. 

2. In a VE zone the minimum elevation of the structure is 

measured to the bottom of the lowest supporting horizontal 

structural member. For height of structural members, ASCE 

24-05 may be referenced. The FBC 2010 refers to ASCE-24- 

05 and table 4-1 for minimum elevation of structures (other 

than parking or storage) located in the VE and AE flood 

zones. 

3. A Category II structure requires the lowest horizontal 

structural member to be constructed at BFE for parallel 

members and BFE plus 1 ft. for perpendicular members. 

4. The vertical clearance for grade separations over roads or 

railroads is the minimum distance between the underside of 

the superstructure and road or railroad. See PPM, Volume 1, 

Section 2.10. 

5. For concrete superstructures classified as moderately 

aggressive or extremely aggressive due to chloride content, 

the minimum vertical clearance is 12 ft. above MHW. For 

steel superstructures, the minimum vertical clearance shall 

be obtained from the District Maintenance Engineer, but 

shall not be less than those specified above for the concrete 

superstructures. 

6. The minimum vertical clearance between the design flood 

stage and the low member of bridges shall be a minimum 

of 2 ft. This clearance is necessary to allow the majority of 

debris to pass without causing damage to the structure. This 

standard does not apply to culverts and bridge-culverts. 

7. The minimum vertical clearance for navigational purposes 

shall be: 

• 6 ft. above the MHW for tidewater bays and streams 

• 6 ft. above the NHW for freshwater rivers, streams, nonregulated/controlled 

canals and lakes 

• 6 ft. above the control elevation for regulated/controlled 

lakes and canals 

3 - 92 


8. For coastal bridges, the vertical clearance of the 

superstructure shall be a minimum of 1 ft. above the 100- 

year design wave crest elevation including the storm surge 

elevation and wind setup. For bridge designs where this 

criterion cannot practically be met, refer to the FDOT 

Drainage Manual, Section 4.9.5. 

Horizontal Waterway Clearances 

Horizontal clearance is defined as the unobstructed clear 

distance between piers, fender systems, culvert walls, etc. 

projected by the bridge normal to the flow. The following 

minimum horizontal clearances shall be provided: 

1. For crossings subject to boat traffic, a minimum horizontal 

clearance of 10 ft. shall be provided. 

2. Where no boat traffic is anticipated, horizontal clearance 

shall be provided consistent with debris conveyance needs 

and structure economy. 

Regulatory Agency Requirements 

Vertical and horizontal clearances will also be subject to the 

requirements of the Coast Guard, Corps of Engineers, Water 

Management District and any other regulatory agency having 

appropriate statutory jurisdiction or authority. Such regulatory 

agency requirements may exceed Department requirements. 


A geotechnical investigation is necessary for the design of the 

new Pier. The geotechnical report should describe properties 

of the soils in the vicinity of the proposed Pier along with its 

Uplands connection and include all of the data collected, along 

with engineering analysis and recommendations. In general, the 

report should cover site terrain and geology including presence 

or depth of water, a boring plan and logs of exploratory borings, 

soil classifications and properties, recommendations for the 

foundation design including vertical and lateral load supporting 

capacities and design recommendations and values for piles. 

Information required from the geotechnical report includes: 

1. Description of site terrain and geology, including presence 

or depth of water. 

2. Description of exploration and sampling methods. 

3. A plan indicating the location of borings and the elevations 

related to the nearest benchmark. Borings and test pits shall 

be numbered and located dimensionally in plan. 

4. An evaluation of the subsurface stratigraphy and indication 

of the results in a cross section profile. 

5. Logs of exploratory borings, including: 

• Surface elevation 

• Elevation, thickness, description and classification of 

each soil stratum 





(continued) 

• Location and type of soil samples 

• Laboratory and field results at appropriate depth 

• Location of water table 

• Location of obstructions 

6. Soil classification and identification shall be in accordance 

with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487) and 

governing Building Code. 

7. Results of any laboratory tests and procedures, appropriate 

to the site conditions, including but not limited to: 

• Classification of potential volumetric swell and shrinkage 

characteristic of cohesive soils by means of Atterberg 

Limit Test (ASTM D4318) 

• Undrained shear strength of cohesive-friction soils by 

means of strain controlled triaxial compression tests 

(ASTM D2850) 

• Soil compressibility by means of one-dimensional 

consolidation tests (ASTM D2435) 

• Water content (ASTM D2216). 

• Dry density of soil (ASTM D2937). 

• Particle size analysis of soils (ASTM D422) 

• Standard penetration test (ASTM D1586) 

• Samples shall be retained by the MEG and shall 

remain open to inspection until the foundation work is 

complete. 

8. Presence of any deleterious substances present in the soil. 

9. Information on settlements to be expected, both short and 

long term and any expected differential settlement. 

10. Recommendations for the foundation design including 

vertical and lateral load supporting capacities. 

11. Site coefficient and/or other seismic design criteria as 

required per pertinent building code(s). 

12. Liquefaction potential analysis and recommendations. 

13. Difficulties that may be encountered during excavation or 

pile driving. 

14. Existence, influence and treatment of expansive soils. 

15. Lateral design pressures for retaining walls and bulkheads, 

including: 

• Active and at-rest pressures including the amount of 

rotation of the wall necessary for active pressures to be 

valid 

• Passive pressures and coefficients of sliding friction 

• Appropriate passive pressures and coefficients of friction 

• Methods by which surcharges can be included 

3 - 94 


• Seismic lateral soil force 

16. Suitability of site excavated material for use as fill or backfill 

and general availability of suitable off-site fill if necessary. 

17. Compaction density of fill and backfill throughout the project 

18. Groundwater elevations and anticipated construction 

problems due to ground water. 

19. Provide recommendations regarding temporary and 

permanent ground water control, if applicable. Specification 

of substructure waterproofing, including waterproofing 

materials and specifications, shall be provided by others. 

20. Presence of alkali or other deleterious material in sufficient 

quantities to affect the construction materials during 

construction or during the life of the structure. In addition, 

the likelihood of corrosion as a problem will be indicated. 

21. Design recommendations and values for piles, including: 

• Skin friction values for uplift 

• End bearing values 

• Lateral bearing values including whether an increase for 

short duration of loading is permissible. Values to be 

expressed in terms of nominal pier/pile diameters 

• Minimum spacing requirements between deep 

foundation elements and/or existing foundations and 

group reduction factors (if appropriate). 

22. Provide estimated pile driving resistance for recommended 

pile capacities for bidding purposes, based on 

recommended minimum delivered hammer energy and 

estimated pile length. 

23. Provide recommendations for pile load testing, including: 

• Protocol for testing of the deep foundations 

• Number and type of tests to be conducted 

• Criteria for determination of a successful test 





(continued) 

Site Work Criteria 


• AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and 

Streets, 6th Edition (2011) 

• AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle 

Facilities, 4th Edition (2002) 

• AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, 4th 

Edition, with 1998 Supplement 

• AASHTO Guide For The Planning, Design And 

Operations Of Pedestrian Facilities, 1st Edition (2004) 

• EPA Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans for 

Construction Activities 

• FLDOT Drainage Handbook (2012) 

• FLDOT and FLDEP 

• Erosion and Sediment Control: Designer and Reviewer 

Manual (June 2007) 

• Stormwater Loading Rate Parameters for Central and 

South Florida, Harvey H. Harper (1994) 

• Florida’s Nonpoint Source Management Program 

(January 2000) 

• Florida’s Plan for Implementation of Nonpoint Source 

Components of Total Maximum Daily Loads (1998) 

• FLDOT Drainage Handbook (2012) 

• Pollutant Removal with Peak and Volume Reduction in 

Florida (May 2007) 

• Florida Development Manual: A Guide to Sound Land 

and Water Management (1988) 

3 - 96 


Mechanical Criteria 


• Florida Fire Prevention Code (NFPA 101, NFPA 1, FL 44 

Rules, FSS 633) 

• National Electric Code - NFPA 70 

• Florida Plumbing Code (with St. Petersburg 

amendments for commercial kitchens) 

• NFPA 13 – Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler 

System 

• NFPA 14 – Standard for the Installation of Standpipe 

System 

• NFPA 24 - Standard for the Installation of Private Fire 

Service Mains and Their Appurtenances 

• NFPA 307 - Standard for the Construction and Fire 

Protection of Marine Terminals, Piers, and Wharves 

• Fire Alarm Code - NFPA 72 

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999 

• ASME A 17.1-00 Safety Code for Elevators and 

Escalators 

• ASHRAE – Design Recommendations for HVAC systems 

• All lighting based standards will be listed in Lighting 

Consultant Report 

• All security and IT standards will be listed in IT/Security 


Mechanical Systems 

Elevators and their associated systems will have ventilation 

requirements as per the International Building Code (IBC) and 

Florida Building Code. These requirements include venting of 

the machine room and hoistway shaft. Mechanical cooling may 

be required and will be evaluated with the elevator consultant. 





(continued) 

Potable Water 








System 


System 








Escalators 






Domestic Water Systems 

Water shall be provided from new connections, one for the 

Welcome Mat and Hub program components and one for the 

Pier. New meters and backflow prevention devices shall be 

provided to comply with the St. Petersburg Water Resources 

Department water and sewer regulations. 

The domestic water system may need to be pressurized by a 

constant pressure electric booster system comprised of three 

pumps, VFD, control panel, sensors, piping connections and 

hydro-pneumatic tank located in a water service/meter room. 

The site water distribution system will be designed in such 

manner as to: 

• Provide potable water in the amount and at the pressure 

required by the building occupancy and type of 

plumbing fixtures utilized in the building. 

• Prevent contamination from non-potable liquids, solids 

or gases. 

• Maintain a maximum velocity in the water supply piping 

of 4 fps to prevent noise and decrease the danger of 

surge pressure shock. 

• Prevent water hammer conditions by providing air 

chambers. 

3 - 98 


Domestic Hot Water 

For bathrooms on the site, hot water will be generated by a local 

point of use storage-type electric water heater. The tank will be 

located near the fixtures served to eliminate the requirements for 

temperature maintenance. 

140º F water will be provided to scullery and rinsing sinks. A 

thermostatic mixing valve will reduce the temperature to 120º F 

to feed the hand sinks. Floor drains will be provided for general 

cleaning purposes. 

• Size each heater based on a modified Hunters Curve 

and anticipated fixture unit count. Special equipment 

demands such as dishwashers shall be added to the 

water heater load. 

• Size the hot water supply and return lines not to exceed 

10°F heat loss. Dead ends shall be limited to 20-ft. 

• Provide combination shut-off and balancing valves in the 

hot water return circulating lines. 

• Provide insulation on all domestic hot water supply, 

horizontal cold water piping and return circulation 

piping. 

All piping shall be insulated per the most stringent requirements 

found in the codes and standards referenced in the general 

section. 

Plumbing Fixtures 

All fixtures shall be provided with individual stop valves. Water 

closets shall be furnished with flush valves and lavatories will be 

provided with electronic faucets. 

• Plumbing fixture accessibility clearances, installation and 

accessories shall be ADA compliant. 

• Plumbing fixtures shall be ultra-low flow water 

conserving/saving type fixtures, faucets and valves. 

• Plumbing fixtures in public areas shall have motion/ 

user sensing devices (with manual by-pass) for fixture 

operation. 

• Drinking fountains shall be provided as indicated on the 

architectural plans and as required by Code. 

• Scald control systems shall be provided in all showers. 





(continued) 

Storm Drainage 








System 


System 








Escalators 




• All Security and IT standards will be listed in IT/Security 


Stormwater Systems 

Stormwater from the roofs will be collected via a system of 

conventional roof scuppers, exterior and interior leaders and 

will be discharged by gravity at grade in coordination with the 

landscape and civil engineer design. The facility will be designed 

in compliance with the city’s redevelopment ordinance for 

Upland stormwater treatment. 

3 - 100 










System 


System 








Escalators 






Sanitary Sewage Systems 

Sanitary sewage from bathrooms and other plumbing fixtures will 

discharge by gravity to the building sewer system. Floor drains 

will be provided in all mechanical rooms with sustainable means 

of trap priming. 

All fixtures will be vented to protect trap seals in accordance with 

the plumbing code. The main vent stacks will be run through the 

roof. 

For the Pier, a series of lift stations will allow sanitary affluent to 

discharge to the street sewer main. 





(continued) 

Natural Gas 








System 


System 








Escalators 






Natural Gas Systems 

Natural gas service will be provided to fuel domestic water 

heaters and kitchen equipment. Separate meters will be 

provided as required. 

Gas fired equipment will be piped in accordance with the 

plumbing code and NFPA 54. An isolation gas cock valve will be 

provided at each piece of equipment. 

3 - 102 


Electrical Criteria 








Escalators 






Electrical Systems 

Incoming Electrical Service Requirements & Metering 

The existing Pier is fed by a 1000KVA 480V transformer, assumed 

to be owned by Progress Energy, that also serves the Inverted 

Pyramid. The new Pier and Hub will each have a new electrical 

power service to feed associated loads. A dedicated pad 

mounted transformer by Progress Energy will be required. 

Emergency and Standby Power System 

There are no planned emergency or standby power systems or 

fuel storage at present. 

Electrical Lighting and Controls 

The lighting design for the complex will be a collaboration 

between Buro Happold and L’Observatoire International, who 

will develop the lighting concepts and specifications for the 

lighting fixtures and controls for all spaces. Buro Happold will 

work closely with the lighting consultant to coordinate the 

electrical requirements of the selected fixtures. 

Fire Detection and Alarm System 

A fire alarm system for the assembly areas will be provided. The 

Hub area shall have a main FACP serving the new Pier. 

Lightning Protection 

The installation of a lightning protection system is being 

considered. 

Security 

Security system requirements will be provided by the specialist 

security consultant. 

Telecom 

Telecom system requirements will be provided by the specialist 

telecom consultant; Verizon is the service provider and 

Brighthouse is the cable service provider. 




MARINA CRITERIA 

General Marina Criteria 

Primary walkways shall be at least 10 ft. wide. No walkways shall 

be less than 8 ft. in overall width. 

Finger piers shall be full length for the largest design vessel 

accommodated and should have a width of at least 10% of their 

length. 

Floating dock freeboard under dead load conditions shall be at 

least 20 to 24 inches from the water line to the deck surface. 

Floating launch and retrieval assistance systems shall be installed 

on the shoreward side of the Marina for kayak and small sailboat 

launching and retrieval. 

Clearances 

Fairways and turning circles shall be at least 1.75 times the 

longest design vessel accommodated in that portion of the 

Marina. Fairways and turning circles shall account for the beam 

and fender clearances of berthed vessels in the Marina. 

The entrance channel shall be at least 50 ft. clear and air draft at 

clear width shall be designed to accommodate two-way traffic. 

If possible, a minimum of 15 ft. air draft at MHHW and 50 ft. 

clear width shall be provided to accommodate most recreational 

vessels. 

Phasing 

The Marina will be constructed in three phases, as described in 

Figure 3.46. 

3 - 104 


Phase 1 

Marina Constructed from Modular Dock Units with Integrated Wave Attenuators 

Phase 2 

Modular Finger Piers Added to Marina Interior 

Phase 3 

Planned Prefabricated Kayak Rental, Concessions and Bait Shop Installed on Floating Dock 

Figure 3.46 Marina Phasing Diagram 




MARINA CRITERIA 

(continued) 

Floating Dock System 

A floating dock system that reduces the number of new 

piles needed while providing the break water necessary to 

support a marine environment within the Lens is planned to 

be implemented. Figure 3.47 illustrates one such structure, 

which will include strict wave attenuation and performance 

specifications for the new floating docks and floating 

breakwaters. The floating dock system being considered 

will surpass strict specifications, withstanding the forces of 

a Category-3 hurricane (sustained winds at 110 mph) with 

associated storm surge, wind and waves while fully loaded, and 

surviving the forces of a Category-4 hurricane (sustained winds 

at 155 mph) while unoccupied. The system includes concrete 

modules connected with a simple flexible bolt/rubber block 

design. 

3 - 106 


Category-3 hurricane (sustained winds 110 mph) with associated storm surge, wind and waves while 

fully loaded (100% occupied) and must survive the forces of a Category-4 hurricane (sustained winds 155 

mph) while unoccupied. The new Marinetek floating dock system will surpass these specifications and 

will be warrantied for 10-years against these conditions. 

Figure 3.47 Example of Floating Dock System 

The unique system and connection design, superior strength, and the ability to perform in rough water 

conditions was what set Marinetek apart and why they were selected for the project. City engineers 

would not accept a system which incorporates “an external waler, or similar, that prohibits adequate 

flexibility during specified design wave conditions”. “The connection components must be designed for 

minimum to no maintenance over the life expectancy of the system”. Marinetek’s system includes 14 ft 

wide x 65 ft long concrete modules which are connected together with a simple flexible bolt/rubber 

block design. This system has been proven to provide an extremely stable dock which can flex as 

required in heavy seas and requires virtually no maintenance. 

Another interesting aspect to this project is how and where Marinetek will construct their pontoons. 

“Due to the large size of the dock sections for this project, our Mobile Production Team will fabricate the 

docks at a Marine Contractors yard located next door to the marina”, reports Bob Berry, Project 

Development Manager for Marinetek. “This will completely eliminate shipping of the floats, which 

greatly reduces costs and delivery time. It also allows City Engineers to easily monitor construction 

Figure 3.48 Serviceability of Floating Dock System 

quality. Once adequately cured, the docks will be launched via travel lift and towed to the site”. “Our 

Mobile Production Teams can fabricate docks virtually anywhere in the world”, reports Berry. 

Phase 1 of the project is scheduled for completion by the Fall of 2012, and phase 2 will be completed in 

2013. 

Figure 3.49 Breakwater Capacity of Floating Dock System 





CRITERIA 

Introduction 

An Underwater Feature at the center of the Lens, focused on life 

beneath the bay surface, has been an important concept since 

the initial design ideas. During the 10-week competition phase, 

the idea relied on cultivating oysters as a key habitat species 

that could provide a foundation for a diverse food web and an 

improvement in water clarity. Additionally, there was interest in 

re-using the piles of the existing pier as a structural framework 

for layers of habitat “trays” or nets to create a home for these 

species. During the competition, the team was advised by Jim 

Culter, a respected benthic scientist at Mote Marine Lab in 

Sarasota, and Robert Semmes of ATM, Coastal Engineers. 

Following the competition, the team began an outreach effort, 

organized by Janicki Environmental, to the local marine science 

community, as well as habitat restoration advocates and other 

stakeholders. A roundtable with members of the marine science 

and ocean communities generated some important comments, 

ideas, and suggestions for what the feature could entail, 

provided the availability of future funding. 

• Tampa Bay water is turbid by nature, leading to 

skepticism that oysters could significantly alter the water 

clarity given the exchange rates likely between waters 

inside and outside the Lens. 

• Due to its depth and location, the feature would need to 

resist strong waves. 

• Habitat creation should focus on creating a variety of 

sheltered spaces and surfaces adaptable to all species 

typical for this location. 

• Use of equipment, such as cameras and audio phones, 

should be considered to facilitate monitoring and 

underwater imagery, both of which, when combined with 

nighttime lighting, could greatly improve public appeal. 

• The feature has great potential to enhance educational 

and research activities and the visibility of local marine 

science institutions, while simultaneously creating a 

framework for interested members of the St. Petersburg 

community. 

Following the roundtable, the design team examined a variety of 

options for artificial reef construction and imaging / monitoring 

technology. Reef options included both building up from the 

bay bottom with structures minimizing the “footprint”, and 

techniques for suspending reef modules from a structural 

framework anchored by the existing piles. After individual review 

with some members of the scientific community, several of these 

options have good possibilities for habitat generation, while 

appearing to be realizable at reasonable cost. 

3 - 108 


Next steps for the Underwater Feature should include 

individually discussing and reviewing further with local scientists 

and habitat restoration experts to identify and develop options 

in more detail; creating mock-ups and monitoring their results 

before resolving a final design; working with the marine science 

and ocean communities to establish community ownership of the 

feature, and, due to its significant potential for attracting grants, 

to identify funding opportunities for further research, design and 

development from a variety of public and private sources. 

Project Goals 

• To highlight the Tampa Bay Estuary and engage the 

public, now and in the future 

• To create a memorable, exciting and original experience 

for the public 

• To include the public, the marine scientific community, 

various schools and neighborhoods, Tampa Bay 

advocacy groups, and the business and educational 

communities so that the feature may be communitysupported 

now and in the future 

• To develop a platform / interface with Tampa Bay for 

learning, research, and education that can evolve over 

time 

Communities and Needs 

The following are the communities, or “clients,” for the project, 

and their respective needs: 

• Public and Visitors - A unique and exciting experience of 

the marine environment in Tampa Bay that helps create 

a visible identity, attracts kids and families, and provides 

and opportunity for involvement. 

• Education and Research Community - An interactive 

platform for engaging the public within the larger 

context of Tampa Bay marine science, instilling a lifelong 

interest that leads to the growth and visibility of the 

field of marine science. Involvement from different 

neighborhoods and schools will be an asset. 

• Business Community - An attraction that generates local 

and international interest in the St. Petersburg waterfront 

while stimulating re-visitation. 

• Restoration Community - A means of showcasing the 

Tampa Bay habitat and the on-going work to improve 

and protect it. 

• The City of St. Petersburg - Achieving the goals of 

the community with assistance from municipal leaders 

charged with leveraging public and private resources in 

a collaborative fashion. 





CRITERIA 

Constraints 

The following constraints have been identified: 

• Limited Funding 

Although identifying both funding and potential 

sponsorships is a constraint, it also offers the opportunity 

for involvement in what could be one of the greatest 

assets to the new Pier as well as the City. 

• Water Turbidity 

Rapid exchange rates and currents make the process 

of clarifying the water within the Lens a challenge, if 

not impossible. Though visibility varies by season and 

rainfall, it is often not possible to see more than three 

feet into the water in the daytime. 

• Waves and Currents 

Stability during major storms is crucial given the location 

of the Underwater Feature. Habitat goals for the project 

must be consistent with these stresses and conditions of 

water movement. 

• Safety 

Hazards to people, boats, manatees, other marine 

species must be avoided. 

• Permitting 

The project timeframe must be considered when 

determining what can be reasonably processed and 

permitted. 

• Maintenance 

The Feature must be largely maintained by nonspecialized 

individuals. The staff and income stream 

need to be identified in order to operate and update the 

feature from year to year. The amount of maintenance 

required must be minimized. 

Approaches and Possible Components 

Technology 

The Underwater Feature has the potential to function as a portal 

or interface where the public and students can view and hear 

what is happening underwater, or have it interpreted for them. 

This interface could be on land, on the Pier, over the internet or 

through docent-led tours. The following are key technological 

components that may be incorporated into the project: 

• Imaging 

The use of technology to communicate life under the 

water can overcome the problem of water clarity. Videoenhanced 

microscopy and high definition sonar imaging 

can circumvent water turbidity and be used as a fixed 

display. 

3 - 110 


Figure 3.50 Marine Science in Classrooms 

Figures 3.51 Habitat Enhancement by Local Scientific Community 





CRITERIA (continued) 

• Acoustical 

Audio technologies can make it possible to “listen to the 

Bay.” 

• Real-Time Monitoring 

Currents, tides, dissolved oxygen, salinity, 3D seismic 

and species variability can be monitored in situ, in real 

time. Though sample collection can be automated 

to some extent, chemical constituents such as 

environmental contaminants, nutrients and pollution 

may require laboratory analysis. 

• Linkage to Internet 

A website and apps can be created for the project, 

making the underwater habitat accessible from 

anywhere. The scope of information provided should 

range from microscopic life to the estuary watershed and 

beyond. 

• System Flexibility 

A basic hardware and software armature that can adapt 

to new developments should be developed. 

• Telepresence 

Telepresence is the set of technologies that give the 

experience of being fully present at a location remote 

from one’s own physical location; a video conference 

is one such example of telepresence. This experience 

of the Underwater Feature may be enabled by 

technologies that implement human sensory elements 

like vision and sound, and can also involve robotic 

technologies such as autonomous underwater vehicles 

(AUVs) and remotely-operated underwater vehicles 

(ROVs). 

• Underwater Lighting (LED) 

Because fish are attracted to light, underwater lighting 

will allow visitors to see much deeper into the water, 

while increasing excitement and providing aesthetic 

appeal. Lighting can be located within a potential reef 

structure to reveal its structure and to make it glow. The 

lighting design needs to be sensitive to marine life’s 

response to natural diurnal cycles, while not visually 

overwhelming or creating unnatural predation. 

• On-Site Energy Generation 

Energy can be generated on location to power the 

technologies discussed in this section. 

3 - 112 


Figures 3.52 Real-Time Monitoring and Imaging Technologies 

Figures 3.53 Linkage to the Underwater Feature via the Internet 






Artificial Reefs 

Artificial reefs create spatial complex shelters and habitats 

within the water as a means of attracting diverse marine 

life. Establishing keystone species will allow for a food web, 

subsequently allowing diversity to flourish. Fish and other 

species can be found at reef structures for feeding, shelter, cover 

from predators, spawning, and reproduction. Artificial reefs need 

to be located at an appropriate water depth. There are two 

subcategories in this regard: 

• Intertidal Reefs occur within the zone of tidal fluctuation. 

At this water depth, habitat structures need to be 

elevated from the seabed. Reef structures are revealed 

at low tide and remain at least partially visible at high 

tide. Zones or islands for bird habitat on structures 

above high tide may also be created. 

• Sub-tidal Reefs occur below the zone of tidal fluctuation. 

Small patches of hard bottom reef habitat occur 

naturally in several areas of Tampa Bay and these rocky 

live bottom areas attract a wide variety of fish and other 

marine life. These areas are not typically visible from 

the surface without imaging technology or underwater 

lighting. 

As oysters and other bivalves settle and grow in the intertidal 

zone, reefs become highly complex. Many structural irregularities 

provide an array of microhabitats for many different species of 

animals. One study listed 303 different species utilizing intertidal 

reefs as habitat. Some typical species include: 

• various sponge species 

• Leptogorgia coral 

• mud crabs 

• flatworms 

• polychaete worms 

• amphipods 

• isopods 

• shrimp 

• squid 

• larval fishes and bottom dwelling fishes 

• foraging fishes 

• hard clams 

• scorched mussels 

• ribbed mussels 

• jingle shells 

• barnacles of the Balanus genus 

• gastropods (snails) 

• conchs 

3 - 114 


Figure 3.54 Habitat-Sensitive Underwater Lighting 






• rocksnails 

• Atlantic oyster drills 

• Tampa drills 

• whelks 

• Sheepshead 

• Mangrove Snapper Bay 

• Pompano 

• Gag Grouper 

• Redfish 

• Black Drum 

• Common Snook 

• Ladyfish 

Programs 

A number of programs can be developed and implemented 

to guide and ensure the continued viability and success of the 

Underwater Feature. These programs can be adapted to the 

different interested communities and adjusted as necessary over 

time. 

• Network 

A facilitated permanent communications network may 

be developed among the stakeholders, extending 

beyond the construction phase for on-going initiatives, 

monitoring and maintenance. A website will be a likely 

basis for this network. 

• Bi-directional Platform 

Two-way communication between the Education 

and Research community and the public needs to be 

enabled via a website and, possibly, an on-site portal. 

• Custodial Organization 

The establishment of a non-profit “Friends of the Reef” 

or similar organization could raise money and even 

manage an endowment to operate and maintain the 

feature with a yearly budget in agreement with the City. 

A long-term marketing strategy may be developed for 

the Lens and the Underwater Feature. 

• Participation 

The public can be actively involved with the feature. For 

example, University of South Florida graduate student 

docents can engage through habitat boat tours from the 

Lens, maintenance, and monitoring. 

• Grants 

The resources, knowledge and experience of the local 

Education and Research community can be tapped in 

order to identify possible projects for grant funding. 

3 - 116 


Figures 3.55 Docent-Led Tours 

Figures 3.56 Enhanced Local Environment: Habitat Population and Protection 






Appearance, Structure, Materials and Research 

Because the structural and substrate appearance of a 

naturally occurring reef cannot be recreated, the design of the 

Underwater Feature must be developed to achieve a level of 

marine beauty as an artificial habitat construction under 12 

ft. of water. Aesthetically pleasing and interesting reef forms 

must be created through an appropriate layout, a sectional 

understanding of the project, and a dimensional study. 

Several conceptual methods for artificial reef designs were 

considered. These are described in Figure 3.56: 

• building up by placing objects directly on the Bay 

bottom 

• building up by minimizing contact with the Bay bottom 

• installing new piles and suspending material from these 

piles 

• reusing existing piles and suspending material from 

them 

The majority of existing piles are planned to be demolished. The 

design team is willing to investigate the structural capacity of a 

small (approximately 20,000 sq. ft.) area of piles to determine if 

they can be kept in place and incorporated into an artificial reef. 

By keeping the existing piles in place and reinforcing them with 

new horizontal bracing, artificial reef balls can be suspended 

far enough from the bottom to allow for shadow movement. 

As with all conceptual artificial methods, careful research and 

consideration will determine appropriateness for this habitat 

and environment. The conceptual plans Figures 3.59 and 3.60 

describe the possible reuse of existing piles as a framework 

supporting the future Underwater Feature. 

A variety of materials will be studied for best suitability within 

existing conditions and for maximum enhancement of the 

habitat (Figure 3.57). Materials include limestone boulders, 

concrete pipe, reclaimed concrete piling and manufactured 

artificial reef modules among others. Limestone is preferred 

over concrete or other materials due to its surface, porosity, 

composition and pH value. Native Florida limestone boulders 

of varying sizes are available from Crystal River, Brooksville and 

other active quarries in the area. A mix of different materials such 

as limestone boulders, reclaimed pilings and concrete support 

slabs can be used in combination. 

With any of these conceptual methods, a natural “reference” 

habitat must be identified to determine the ecological goals for 

the Underwater Feature. Scientific studies comparing natural and 

manmade material for artificial reefs are available, as are studies 

of artificial reef habitats incorporating both. 

3 - 118 


Figures 3.57 Artificial Reef Construction Options and Built Precedents 

Figures 3.58 Tampa Bay Artificial Reefs 






Figures 3.59 Plan Showing Existing Piles to Remain 

3 - 120 


Figures 3.60 Plans Showing Reuse of Existing Piles 




FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY 

REQUIREMENTS 

The following section provides a brief overview of the project’s 

fire & life safety design approach. A detailed presentation of 

this strategy was given to the St. Petersburg Building & Fire 

Departments on 26 September 2012. A copy of this presentation, 

along with the resulting meeting minutes, are provided in 

Appendices B and C of this Report for reference. 


The fire safety strategy for the Pier will be designed in 

accordance with the applicable codes and regulations for St. 

Petersburg – namely the: 

• Florida Building Code 2010 

• Florida Fire Prevention Code 2010 

In addition to these base codes, additional guidance has been 

sought from the following reference documents: 

• International Fire Code, 2009 Edition [Chapter 45 – 

Marinas] 

• NFPA 302 - Fire Protection Standard for Pleasure and 

Commercial Motor Craft 

• NFPA 303 - Fire Protection Standard for Marinas and 

Boatyards 



• NFPA 1405 - Guide for Land-Based Fire Fighters Who 

Respond to Marine Vessel Fires 

• NFPA 1925 - Standard on Marine Fire-Fighting Vessels 


Systems 

• NFPA 14 – Standard for the Installation of Standpipe and 

Hose Systems 



• NFPA 72 - National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code 

Occupancy Classification 

Under the Building Code, the Pier will be classified as an 

‘assembly structure’ (A5) which is predominately intended for 

the viewing of, or participation in, outdoor activities. Other 

uses on the Pier (retail, storage, dining, etc.) are all sufficiently 

small enough to be considered ‘ancillary’ uses to the Pier’s main 

assembly designation. 

Occupant Load 

A variety of occupant load factors will be adopted for the 

various use areas comprising the Pier (detailed in Appendix B: 

Conceptual Fire Safety Strategy Presentation, September 26, 

2012). When adopting these factors, a maximum occupant load 

3 - 122 


for the Pier (during special events such as New Years Eve or 4th 

of July) has been calculated in the region of 9,000 people. It is 

to be noted however, that while this maximum occupant load 

will be used for the Pier’s egress calculations, it is expected that 

‘normal-day’ occupancy would be significantly lower than this 

number. 

Performance Based Egress Design Approach 

While the Building Code places no limitation on distances 

of travel in open-air assembly structures, the St. Petersburg 

Building & Fire Departments have requested that the egress 

time of the Pier be assessed in order to establish an overall 

‘safe’ evacuation time for the structure at times of maximum 

occupation. As part of this evacuation time calculation, a 

performance-based design approach will be adopted in order to 

assess the following: 

1. The DISTANCE required for an occupant to move away from 

a fire location such that the occupant is considered ‘safe’ 

2. The TIME taken for occupants to move away from a fire 

incident to a ‘safe’ location 

3. The TIME taken to COMPLETELY evacuate the Pier 

This is seen as an appropriate approach on the basis that; 

• As an outdoor space, there will be no smoke 

accumulation on the Pier (smoke will dissipate into the 

atmosphere) 

• Occupants will have sufficient distance/space to relocate 

to an area of relative safety, remote from a fire incident, 

while still remaining on the Pier 

A fire analysis/radiation study will be performed to determine 

the effects on occupants from a single design fire scenario on 

the Pier. Occupant safety, and hence the determination of a ‘safe 

distance’, will be measured against the radiation (heat transfer) 

that the fire emits to a defined zone on the Pier. A maximum 

radiative heat flux and temperature, based on research, will be 

selected for the acceptance criteria. Due to smoke’s ability to 

dissipate into the atmosphere, visibility through smoke, and 

other effects related to smoke will not be accounted for as part 

of the pass/fail criteria. 

In addition to this radiation study, an egress analysis will be 

completed to evaluate the time taken for occupants to reach a 

safe distance from a fire incident as well as to evacuate the Pier 

in its entirety. The software used for this study assigns a series 

of characteristics to the occupants based on available research 

and data. Among others, these characteristics include travel/ 

movement speeds, available paths based on the Pier’s geometry, 

and the ability for people to utilize egress elements due to their 

widths. 




FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY 

REQUIREMENTS 

(continued) 

Fire Department Access and Facilities 

To enable effective fire-fighting operations on the Pier, access for 

fire appliances will be made along the length of the 20-ft section 

of the Overwater Drive all the way to the end of the Promontory 

where a vehicle ‘turning circle’ will be provided. Because the 

Pier is part of a fire apparatus access road, it will be constructed 

and maintained in accordance with AASHTO regulations and 

designed for the imposed loads created by a fire appliance of up 

to 50,000 lbs. 

While there will be no defined Fire Department access path on 

the Pier, the entire 20-ft wide portion of the Overwater Drive 

will be designed for fire vehicle access. When responding to a 

fire incident on the Pier, a management vehicle (a small car or 

golf buggy type vehicle) will take the lead to ‘part the crowd’ 

and make way for the fire vehicle. Given the close interaction 

of vehicles and occupants in this scenario, an emergency 

management procedure designed to cater for such situations 

will be developed. It is to be noted that a large portion of the 

Pier’s evacuation is expected to be completed before the arrival 

of the Fire Department. As a consequence, the need for fire 

vehicle access would occur only towards the end of the occupant 

evacuation phase and the extent of fire vehicle/occupant 

interaction would be greatly reduced. Water supplies for firefighting 

will be provided by the use of a standpipe system with 

outlets provided every 300 ft along the Pier. A wet system will be 

provided at the Marina. 

Fire Protection Systems 

Source of Water 

Water will be provided by an estimated 6” fire service (one for 

the Welcome Mat and Hub and one for the Pier) supplied from 

the city water main. Backflow prevention devices will be installed 

in accordance with the St. Petersburg water and sewer rules and 

regulations. 

An electric fire pump may be provided to supply the 

required 100 psi at the highest and most remote standpipe 

hose connection. The fire pump system will be designed in 

accordance with NFPA 20 and include a pressure maintenance 

pump, control panels and test connection. The fire pump will be 

located in a dedicated room outside the flood line. 

The site will be provided with Siamese (fire department) 

connections. The Siamese connection will serve both the 

automatic sprinkler system and the fire standpipe system. 

Sprinkler System 

All enclosed buildings will be sprinklered with the exception of 

the main electrical room. Sprinklers will be designed based on 

the occupancy hazard of the design areas. 

All pipe sizes will be based on hydraulic calculations. 

3 - 124 


Standpipe System 

The Pier will be provided with a Class I standpipe system with 

anti-corrosion fittings and 2.5” fire main outlets every 300 ft 

along the Pier. Two fill locations for the Fire Department, used to 

pressurize the fire main, will be provided at Pier entry points. 

Portable Fire Extinguishers 

Portable fire extinguishers, in accordance with NFPA 10, will be 

provided next to each standpipe outlet at 300-ft intervals along 

the Pier. Hoserack, hosereels or standpipe cabinets will not be 

provided. 




ACCESSIBILITY AND CODE 

REQUIREMENTS 

Accessibility Requirements 

This section contains a summary of scoping and technical 

requirements for accessibility to the new Pier by individuals with 

disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 

1990. A document listing the full ADA Accessibility Guidelines 

for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG) is provided at the following 

web address: 

http://www.access-board.gov/adaag/html/adaag.htm 

Accessible Sites and Exterior Facilities 

At least one accessible route shall be provided within the 

boundary of the site from public transportation stops, accessible 

parking spaces, passenger loading zones, and public streets or 

sidewalks to an accessible building entrance. 

Parking Spaces 

In each parking area providing self-parking by employees 

or visitors, or both, accessible spaces shall be provided. The 

Dolphin Lot, which in its proposed configuration will be the 

site of 312 parking spaces, will have a minimum of 8 accessible 

spaces. The Pelican Lot, which is expected to have 157 parking 

spaces, will have a minimum of 5 accessible parking spaces. 

In both lots, one accessible space will be served by an access 

aisle with a minimum width of 96” and shall be designated “van 

accessible.” Accessible parking spaces shall have a minimum 

width of 96”. 

Space Allowance 

The minimum clear width for single wheelchair passage shall 

be 32” at a point and 36” continuously, except at doors. The 

minimum width for two wheelchairs to pass is 60”. The space 

required for a wheelchair to make a 180-degree turn is a clear 

space of 60” diameter or a T-shaped space. 

Accessible Route 

At least one accessible route within the boundary of the site shall 

be provided from public transportation stops, accessible parking 

and accessible passenger loading zone. The accessible route 

shall, to the maximum extent feasible, coincide with the route for 

the general public. At least one accessible route shall connect 

accessible buildings, facilities, elements and spaces that are on 

the same site. An accessible route with a running slope greater 

than 1:20 is a ramp and the cross slope of an accessible route 

shall not exceed 1:50. 

Ramps 

The least possible slope shall be used for any ramp; the 

maximum slope of a ramp in new construction shall be 1:12. 

The maximum rise for any run shall be 30”. The minimum clear 

width of a ramp shall be 36”. Ramps shall have level landings at 

bottom and top of each ramp and each ramp run. The landing 

shall be at least as wide as the ramp run leading to it and its 

length shall be a minimum of 60”. 

3 - 126 


Stairs 

On any given flight of stairs all steps shall have uniform riser 

heights and uniform tread widths. Stair treads shall be no less 

than 11” wide, measured from riser to riser. Open risers are not 

permitted. Handrails shall be continuous along both sides of 

stairs. 

Doors 

Doorways shall have a minimum clear opening of 32” with the 

door open 90 degrees, measured between the face of the door 

and the opposite stop. The minimum space between two hinged 

or pivoted doors in series shall be 48” plus the width of any door 

swinging into the space. 





REQUIREMENTS (continued) 

Occupancy 

Multiple meetings were held with the City’s Building Official to 

determine the criteria for evaluating occupant loads on the new 

Pier. The new Pier offers multiple assembly areas with accessory 

use mercantile businesses. Maximum occupant loads will be 

calculated during peak use times such as the 4th of July. A 

decrease of 5% in the total net square footage number has been 

allowed to account for fixed benches, structural columns, trash 

cans and other site furnishings. This net usable area is used to 

calculate occupant loads. 

Outdoor areas such as “yards, patios, courts and similar outdoor 

areas accessible to and usable by building occupants shall be 

provided with means of egress as required. The occupant load 

of such outdoor areas shall be assigned by the building official 

in accordance with the anticipated use” (2010 Florida Building 

Code 1004.8). 

3 - 128 


401’ 805’ 462’ 

Distance from Promontory to Land 

via the Overwater Drive: 1570 LF 

Distance from Promontory to Land 

via the Overwater Bridge: 1480 LF 

B 

C 

A 

AREA 1: Overwater Drive and Bridge 

AREA 2: Gathering Area 

AREA 3: Promontory 

NET USABLE OCCUPANT 

OCCUPANCY 

AREA (S.F) LOAD 

49,223 1 per 15 sf net 3,282 

15,865 1 per 7 sf net 2,266 

6,823 1 per 7 sf net 975 

AREA 4: Floating Dock 8,705 1 per 15 sf net 580 

A: Restrooms 

236 

B: Restrooms 

508 

C: Concession 

375 

TOTAL 

81,735 

7,103 

Figure 3.61 Maximum Occupant Loads 






Applicable Codes and Standards 

Components of the new Pier shall conform at a minimum to the 

latest editions of the following codes and standards: 

• Building Codes - IBC (International Building Code) 

• Florida Building Code 2010 


Construction 

• City of St. Petersburg Engineering Design Standards 

• City of St. Petersburg Codes and Ordinances 

• FAA Height Restrictions Associated with Albert Whitted 

Municipal Airport 

• Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 

• Design of Steel Structures - AISC 

• Design of Concrete Structures - ACI 

• Design of Pier and Wharf Structures - Unified Facilities 

Criteria (UFC) 

- UFC 2-220-01N, Geotechnical Engineering Procedures 

for Foundation Design of Buildings and Structures 

- UFC 3-300-10N, Design: General Structural 

Requirements 

- UFC 3-310-01, Design, Structural Load Data 

- UFC 4-151-10, General Criteria for Waterfront 

Construction 

- UFC 4-152-01, Design: Piers and Wharves 

- UFC 4-152-07, Design: Small Craft Berthing Facilities 

• Design of Coastal Structures - USACE CEM 

• Standard Specification for Highway Bridges - AASHTO 

• Wind Design - ASCE 7 




• LP Gas Code - NFPA 58 

• Americans with Disabilities Act 

• Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction 

2012 

• Federal Highway Administration - Guidelines for 

Designing Shared Use Paths, Sidewalks and Trails 

3 - 130 


Risk Category Descriptions 

The following is a description of risk categories summarized from 

ASCE/SEI 24-05. 

Risk Category I 

Buildings and other structures that represent a low hazard to 

human life in the event of failure including, but not limited to: 

• Agricultural facilities 

• Certain temporary facilities 

• Minor storage facilities 

Risk Category II 

All buildings and other structures except those listed in 

Categories I, III and IV. 

Risk Category III 

Buildings and other structures that represent a substantial hazard 

to human life in the event of failure including, but not limited to: 

• Buildings and other structures where more than 300 

people congregate in one area 

• Buildings and other structures with day-care facilities 

with capacity greater than 150 

• Buildings and other structures with elementary school or 

secondary school facilities with capacity greater than 250 

• Buildings and other structures with a capacity greater 

than 500 for colleges or adult education facilities 

• Healthcare facilities with a capacity of 50 or more 

resident patients, but not having surgery or emergency 

treatment facilities 

• Jails and detention facilities 

• Power generating stations and other public utility 

facilities not included in Category IV 

Risk Category IV 

Buildings and other structures designated as essential facilities 

including, but not limited to: 

• Hospitals and other healthcare facilities having surgery 

or emergency treatment facilities 

• Fire, rescue, ambulance and police stations and 

emergency treatment facilities 

• Designated earthquake, hurricane, or other emergency 

shelters 

• Designated emergency preparedness, communication 

and operation centers and other facilities required for 

emergency response 

• Power generating stations and other public utility 

facilities required during an emergency 

• Ancillary structures required for operation of Category IV 

structures during an emergency 

• Aviation control towers, air traffic control centers and 

emergency aircraft hangars 






• Water storage facilities and pump structures required to 

maintain water pressure for fire suppression 

• Buildings and other structures having critical national 

defense functions 

• Buildings and other structures containing sufficient 

quantities of hazardous materials considered to be 

dangerous to the public if released 

Risk Category Requirements 

The following are structural requirements for each of the four 

Risk Categories, summarized from ASCE/SEI 24-05. 

Risk Category I 

Risk Category I structures require the lowest horizontal structural 

member to be constructed at design flood elevation (DFE), 

regardless of orientation. 

Risk Category II 

Risk Category II structures require the lowest horizontal structural 

member to be constructed at DFE for members parallel to wave 

action and base flood elevation (BFE) + 1’-0” or DFE, whichever 

is higher, for members perpendicular to wave action. 

Risk Category III 

Risk Category III structures require the lowest horizontal 

structural member to be constructed at BFE + 1’-0” or DFE, 

whichever is higher for members parallel to wave action and BFE 

+2’-0” or DFE, for members perpendicular to wave action. 

Risk Category IV 

Risk Category IV structures require the lowest horizontal 

structural member to be constructed at BFE + 1’-0” or DFE, 

whichever is higher for members parallel to wave action and BFE 

+2’-0” or DFE, whichever is higher for members perpendicular to 

wave action. 

Risk Category Recommendation 

The new Pier is a pleasure pier accommodating a variety of 

programs, from a marina for transient boats to fishing and 

concessions, as well as a more focused retail and dining area 

on the Uplands called the Hub. The project is located in a VE- 

8, Coastal High Hazard Flood Zone with a BFE of +8-0” MSL 

(NAVD88) and will be designed to meet lateral wind loads 

described by ASCE 7-10, adopted by the State in March of 2012. 

Because of its variable programming, there will be special events 

at which more than 300 congregate in a single area, however, the 

Pier and the Hub are intended to be closed when wind speeds 

reach Hurricane Force Category 1 levels (76 mph) thus posing 

no substantial hazard to human life in the event of failure. Finally, 

the new Pier is not an essential facility and has no emergency, 

defense or strategic function. For these reasons, the new Pier will 

be classified as a Category II structure. 

3 - 132 


Figure 3.62 Example of Risk Category I Structure 

Figure 3.63 Example of Risk Category II Structure 

Figure 3.64 Example of Risk Category III Structure 

Figure 3.65 Example of Risk Category IV Structure 






Risk Category Design Implications 

The following are design implications for each zone of the new 

Pier, as required for Risk Category II structures. Figure 3.66 

describes the different zones of the project that are subject to 

the design criteria for Risk Category II structures. Figure 3.27, 

the Flood Insurance Rate Map for Pinellas County, Florida and 

Incorporated Areas, describes existing flood conditions and 

zones for the site. Additional information pertaining to flood 

design and construction is presented in Appendix K: Flood 

Resistant Design and Construction. 

Zone A 

The bottom of all structural slabs for programmed spaces is to 

be at or above +9’-0” MSL 

Zone B 

The distance from MSL to the bottom of the lowest horizontal 

structural members supporting the Overwater Drive are to be 

+9’-0” (BFE + 1’-0”) as described in Figure 3.62. 

Zone C 

The distance from MSL to the lowest horizontal structural 

members supporting the Promontory is to be +9’-0” (BFE + 1’- 

0”). 

Zone D 

The floating dock is not considered a building or structure and 

floats +2-0” MSL. 

Zone E 

Wind loads will correspond to a wind speed of 145 mph (3 

second peak gust). Wind tunnel testing based on actual wind 

data and topography will ultimately be utilized to accurately 

calculate the wind pressures applied on the canopy. Wind 

pressures will be calculated using Exposure D. 

Zone F 

Occasional flooding will be experienced as it is located below 

BFE. Zone F will be infrequently occupied. 

3 - 134 


Zone A 

Zone B 

Zone C 

Zone D 

Zone E 

Zone F 

Figure 3.66 Project Zones 




PERMITTING AND 

DEMOLITION 

New St. Petersburg Pier Permitting 

The City of St. Petersburg submitted an environmental resource 

permit (ERP) on August 31, 2012 to the Southwest Florida Water 

Management District (SWFWMD) and the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers to demolish the existing Pier and construct the new 

Pier. 

The construction of the new Pier will result in a net environmental 

benefit compared to the existing Pier. The new Pier shades 60% 

less bay bottom and the plan eliminates overwater parking, while 

only emergency vehicles and public “trams” for transporting 

visitors and provisions to and from the Promontory will be 

permitted on the Pier. In addition, the number of support piles 

impacting the bay bottom will be reduced. 

The following is a list of agencies that will serve as resources in 

the permitting process: 

• St. Petersburg Construction Services and Permitting 

Department 

http://www.stpete.org/development 

• St. Petersburg Development Review Services - Planning 

& Zoning 

http://www.stpete.org/development/Land_ 

Development_Regs.asp 

• St. Petersburg Engineering Department 

http://www.stpete.org/engineering 

• Southwest Florida Water Management Department 

(SWFWMD) - Tampa Service Office 

http://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us 

• US Army Corps of Engineers - Tampa 

http://saj.usace.army.mil 

• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

http://www.faa.gov 

• Pinellas County Water & Navigation Authority 

http://www.pinellascounty.org/environment/watershed/ 

water_navigation.htm 

Required approvals for the project include: 

• Permit for Demolition 

• Permit for Building Construction 

• Right-of-Way Permit 

• SWFWMD Permit 

• US Army Corp of Engineers Permit 

• FAA Notice of No Hazard to Air Navigation 

3 - 136 


Pier Demolition 

The existing structure will be demolished using land and 

water-based construction equipment. The surface structures, 

including the Inverted Pyramid, retail area, landscaping, pavers, 

and asphalt paving, will be removed and taken to approved 

landfills or recyclers. The remaining steel reinforced concrete 

substructure, comprised of the pier deck, pile caps, and piles, 

will be taken to approved landfills or recyclers or will be used to 

construct a shoreline stabilization revetment at Albert Whitted 

Airport. 

Following deployment of turbidity barriers around the active 

construction area, the pier deck will be demolished or cut 

into smaller segments to be lifted using cranes located on the 

adjacent deck area or on barges. The connections between 

the pile caps and piles will be demolished or cut, and the 

reinforcing bars cut to release the pile caps from the piles. The 

majority of the piles supporting the existing pier will be cut off 

at an elevation 1 ft. below the mudline. Both the deck and the 

pile caps will be transported to the Uplands for processing and 

disposal. 

Piles in the vicinity of the proposed marina will be extracted in 

their entirety and piles in the proposed reef area will be cut off 

approximately at mean lower low water elevation for reuse in 

supporting the proposed reef, or if determined to be unsuitable 

for re-use, will be cut off at an elevation 1 ft. below the mudline. 

Cut-off piles will require localized disturbance of the bay 

bottom to provide access to the cut-off elevation. Piles to be 

fully extracted will utilize water and air jetting along the pile to 

release it from the bay bottom. 

Existing 20-ft. by 20-ft. concrete foundation caissons, supporting 

the Inverted Pyramid and glass elevator structure, will remain 

undisturbed. The new design intends to reuse the caissons. 

Albert Whitted Airport Shoreline Stabilization 

The eastern shoreline of the Albert Whitted Airport is comprised 

of approximately 2,500 linear-ft. of bulkhead, which is degraded 

with areas of wall collapse and significant loss of soil in several 

locations. 

Clean cementitious material from the demolition of the existing 

pier will be transported by truck or barge from the pier to the 

airport shoreline and used to construct a shoreline stabilization 

revetment. The concrete will be clean of asphalt and other 

materials found on the existing pier and will be processed 

into pieces ranging from 2 ft. to 6 ft. in the longest dimension. 

Reinforcing steel will be cut off flush to the face of the concrete. 

With turbidity barriers in place, material will be dumped from 

the shoreline by trucks or will be removed by crane from barges. 

Barges will be prohibited from entering the existing seagrass 

beds along the shoreline. 





DEMOLITION (continued) 

The shoreline stabilization revetment extends approximately 

32 ft. from the existing shoreline and will impact approximately 

1.8 acres of bay bottom. The revetment toe will be located a 

minimum of 24 ft. landward of existing seagrass beds. 

Water Quality Monitoring 

The active work areas will be encompassed by turbidity 

curtains to contain any turbidity generated during demolition 

or construction. Turbidity will be monitored daily by an 

independent 3 rd party during construction activities at a 

“downstream” location 500 ft. outside of the turbidity barrier 

and at a baseline location away from the construction area. 

Construction will be suspended when turbidity readings exceed 

29 NTU’s above the background reading until readings are within 

the 29 NTU limit and the source of the elevated turbidity is 

rectified. 

Pier Structure Environmental Considerations 

The St. Petersburg Pier is located in the Pinellas Aquatic Preserve 

in Tampa Bay. This area is designated as an Outstanding Florida 

Water (OFW). The City of St. Petersburg owns the submerged 

lands around and under the existing and proposed Pier. 

Shading 

Currently, the Pier shades approximately 230,000 sq. ft. of bay 

bottom. The existing structure is a minimum of 100 ft. wide up to 

300 ft. wide with a structure bottom elevation of approximately 

5 ft. above MSL. The proposed Pier reduces overwater shading 

by 60%, shading approximately 93,000 sq. ft. of bay bottom, 

with width ranging from 10 to 20-ft. The 10-ft. wide Overwater 

Bridge portion of the Pier has a bottom structure elevation 

of approximately +25 ft. above MSL and is not expected to 

permanently shade bay bottom. 

Number of Piles 

The existing Pier has approximately 1,500 piles supporting 

the pier approach, pier head, and boat docks. The Inverted 

Pyramid and glass elevator are supported by five (5) 20-ft. square 

concrete caissons. The proposed Pier has approximately 430 

piles associated with the Overwater Drive, Overwater Bridge, 

and Canopy. The proposed Underwater Feature includes the 

potential reuse of an additional 130 existing piles or the install of 

new piles to support the reef infrastructure. 

Seagrass 

Existing seagrass beds are located near the shoreline in water 

depths ranging from 4 to 9 ft. No seagrass was identified in the 

100-ft. wide area where the existing Pier crosses these depths. 

Construction barges will be prohibited from approaching within 

20-ft. of the existing seagrass beds. 

The new Pier includes two structures crossing the seagrass 

habitat area including the 20 ft. wide Overwater Drive with deck 

at elevation +12 ft. above MSL and one 10 ft. wide “walking 

3 - 138 


pier” with deck elevation at +29 ft. above MSL. The walking 

piers, with their narrow width and high elevation above the water 

surface, will result in no permanent shading impact on seagrass. 

The Overwater Drive will also allow some sunlight penetration. 

The new Pier results in a net benefit to seagrass by reducing 

shading by more than 75% in these areas. 

Essential Fish Habitat 

Essential fish habitat in the pier area is generally comprised 

of construction debris that has fallen off the Pier over time. 

This material will be left in place where possible, while new 

fish habitat will be created along the Albert Whitted Airport 

shoreline. 

Endangered Species 

Manatee and sawtooth fish are found in the project area. No 

endangered bird species habitat has been observed in the 

project area. Construction is expected to conform to standard 

manatee construction guidelines, including slow speed 

waterborne equipment, observing for the presence of manatees, 

and ceasing work when a manatee is present. 

The existing Pier offers recreational fishing and provides 24 

transient boat slips. The new Pier will also include fishing, but 

motorized boating will be eliminated from the new design 

thereby reducing impacts to endangered species due to the 

proposed construction activities. 

Stormwater 

On the existing Pier and its approach, approximately 100,000 

sq. ft. of roadway is graded to funnel stormwater into grates 

along the Pier roadway gutter where the stormwater discharges 

directly into the Bay without retention or treatment. There are 10 

stormwater grates on the pier head, and 18 grates on the pier 

approach. 

On the new Pier, the overwater area is expected to generate 

less stormwater pollutant loading compared to the existing Pier 

due to the elimination of passenger vehicle traffic and parking 

areas and overall reduced pier size. The proposed stormwater 

drainage for the overwater elements, including walkways, 

Canopy, and Promontory, continues the existing practice of 

draining directly into the Bay via sheet flow or gratings inset into 

the pier deck. 

On the adjacent Upland areas, the existing stormwater collection 

and discharge system will be maintained where possible. In 

areas where new construction changes curb lines or grades, or 

interferes with existing drainage structures, modifications will 

be made to the existing system to accommodate the new site 

features. The Hub area will be constructed over existing parking 

spaces, reducing parking capacity by 120 vehicles and reducing 

the associated pollutant loading to the stormwater. Compliance 

with the City of St. Petersburg’s Drainage and Surface Water 

Management Ordinance will be required. 





DEMOLITION (continued) 

During construction, a detailed stormwater management plan 

will be implemented incorporating best practices including silt 

fencing and filter media for storm drains for maintaining quality 

of the storm water effluent reaching the bay. 

Water Dependent Use 

The existing Pier includes retail spaces for souvenir shops, bait 

and tackle, clothing, and restaurants. Most of the existing retail 

will be relocated from the Pier to the landside. Enclosed spaces 

remaining on the Pier are water dependent uses including food 

service areas for visitors, restrooms, elevators and utility rooms, 

and management service offices for the marina. 

Mitigation 

The new Pier footprint and design features result in a net 

environmental benefit. Environmental benefits include reduced 

pollutant loading from vehicles by eliminating passenger vehicle 

access on the new Pier, reduced overwater footprint to reduce 

bay bottom shading including 75% reducing in shading in 

seagrass habitat areas, and a reduced number of piles impacting 

the bay bottom. The new Pier has approximately 1/3 the number 

of support piles compared to the existing Pier. The shoreline 

revetment at the Albert Whitted Airport stabilizes the existing 

shoreline/seawall, does not impact existing seagrass areas, and 

will reduce sediment runoff from the upland during storm events. 

Marina Environmental Considerations 

The existing Pier boat slips support docking of up to 24 transient 

boats. The ERP application included a 24 slip transient Marina. 

The proposed Pier now includes a non-motorized Blue Ways 

marina, further reducing the potential pollutant loading and 

improving the net benefit to the environment. If the final 

design maintains the non-motorized marina, the reduction in 

the environmental impact will not require a modification to the 

permit. The marina floating docks will be designed with wave 

attenuation to provide protection from the north, west, and 

south directions. 

Analysis of marina flushing shows that tidal circulation in the 

proposed transient marina reduces a conservative tracer to less 

than 10% residual concentration in 0.17 to 0.45 days, meeting the 

state guideline of 10% residual concentration after 96 hours. 

Underwater Feature Environmental Considerations 

The planned Underwater Feature, located in 12 to 14-ft. water 

depths, consists of concrete reef structures mounted to the top 

of piles. The reef structures are located in the intertidal zone and 

are intended to provide habitat for fish and other sea life. The 

Underwater Feature offers potential educational opportunities 

including educational signs and a small amphitheater for docent 

or teacher presentations. 

3 - 140 


The Underwater Feature will be constructed of concrete 

designed to accommodate underwater habitat development. 

The piles supporting the reef structure will be spaced 10 to 

20-ft. apart and will not measurably inhibit flow through the 

reef area. As such, the reef is not expected to result in adverse 

impacts to the environment and may provide a net benefit to 

the environment by creating fish habitat and promoting reef 

development. 

Construction Methodologies 

Demolition shall be performed by sawcutting, shearing, and 

jack-hammering existing concrete using land and water-based 

equipment. Turbidity barriers will surround the active demolition 

areas and water quality will be sampled for turbidity. Markers 

will be placed at the perimeter of the existing seagrass beds to 

prevent construction equipment from entering the seagrass area. 

Concrete piles identified to be fully removed may require 

water and air jetting to remove the piles from the bay bottom 

sediments. Turbidity within the curtained area due to jetting will 

be measured and the barriers will be left in place until turbidity 

returns to background levels. 

Concrete will be processed for size and to remove exposed 

reinforcing steel bars. Concrete will be hauled to the disposal 

location using barges or trucks. Following demolition the bay 

bottom will be surveyed and divers will recover any demolition 

debris that has fallen to the bay bottom. 

The shoreline revetment at Albert Whitted Airport will be 

constructed by directly placing concrete material taken from the 

existing Pier substructure into place by dumping from a truck or 

pushing into place via dozer and/or excavator bucket. Dust and 

small debris will not be permitted at the revetment and will be 

taken to an approved landfill or recycler. 

The new Pier will be constructed using land based equipment 

staged from the existing Pier (prior to Pier demolition) or using 

water based equipment. Turbidity barriers will surround the 

active demolition areas and water quality will be sampled for 

turbidity. Pre-cast concrete and/or steel pipe piles will be driven 

using impact or vibratory hammers or by water and air jetting 

into place. Pier decks, the Promontory, the concrete Canopy, and 

reef structure will be constructed using pre-cast and/or cast in 

place concrete. 

Upland construction will begin following installation of silt 

fencing around the construction area and filter media installed 

at storm drain inlets. Exposed soil will be landscaped or planted 

with grass prior to removal of silt fencing. 


4COMPONENT 

PLANNING 

CRITERIA

INTRODUCTION 

The basic “building block” for describing the organization of 

project information in this document is the program component. 

A program component can be defined as a discrete grouping 

of assigned spaces and activities that are physically related by 

their common mission to satisfy a specific group of functions or 

operations. 

Each component is herein described as a set of specifications. 

For each component, an architectural description is followed 

by a more comprehensive description, definition and 

characterization of subcomponents. The final portion of each 

component description is technical in nature and includes 

mechanical, electrical, plumbing and technology requirements. 



4 COMPONENT PLANNING CRITERIA 

PROGRAM COMPONENTS 

Components 

Program components for the new St. Petersburg Pier include: 

• Welcome Mat - 47,400 sq. ft. 

• Hub - 22,350 sq. ft. 

• Overwater Drive - 34,050 sq. ft. 

• Overwater Bridge - 20,100 sq. ft. 

• Lens Canopy - 54,500 sq. ft. 

• Promontory - 18,050 sq. ft. 

• Lens Marina - 9,150 sq. ft. 

• Underwater Feature - 20,000 sq. ft. 

General Organization 

Uplands 

The overland components of the project – the Welcome Mat 

and the Hub – are constructed on the existing Uplands area. 

This portion of the project requires no specialized marine 

construction and selective demolition. 

Overwater 

The Overwater components of the project – the Overwater 

Drive, Overwater Bridge, Promontory, Lens Canopy and Marina 

– comprise the Pier elements of the project. These components 

will require specialized marine construction and demolition of 

the existing Pier. 

4 - 2 


LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.1 Program Components of the new Pier 




EXISTING CONDITIONS 

The existing Pier extends 1440’-0” into Tampa Bay with an 

observation deck located 1140’-0” from shore. As a means 

of maintaining and enhancing the experience of the existing 

Pier, the new Pier extends 1247’-0 into Tampa Bay and has 

observation platforms located 1181’-0” from shore, enhancing 

the viewing experience of the City’s skyline. 

Figures 4.2 and 4.3 describe and compare the general attributes 

of the existing and proposed Piers in plan and elevation. Figure 

4.4 provides a three-dimensional comparison between the 

existing Inverted Pyramid building and the new Pier. 

4 - 4 


OBSERVATION 

DECK BACK 

TO CITY SKYLINE 

EXISTING 

PIER 

OVERALL LENGTH 

FROM UPLAND TO 

EASTERN 

TERMINUS / 

1440’ 

DISTANCE FROM 

OBSERVATION 

DECK TO UPLAND / 

1140’ 

1140' 

1440' 

PROPOSED 

PIER 



EASTERN 

TERMINUS / 

1247’ 

OVERLOOK 

BALCONIES BACK 


DISTANCE FROM 

OBSERVATION 

DECK TO UPLAND / 

1181’ 

0’ 50’ 100’ 200’ 

1181' 

1247' 

Figure 4.2 Comparison of Existing and New Piers in Plan 




EXISTING CONDITIONS 

(continued) 

EXISTING 

PIER 



EASTERN 

TERMINUS / 

1440’ 

HEIGHT FROM WATER 

TO THE TOP OF THE 

STRUCTURE / 

76’-8” 

OVERLOOK 



+52’-0” 

PROPOSED 

PIER 



EASTERN 

TERMINUS / 

1247’ 

HEIGHT FROM WATER 

TO THE TOP OF THE 

STRUCTURE / 

86’-0” 

RESTROOMS 

SHADE CANOPY 

SHADE CANOPY 

MARINA 

OVERLOOK 



+52’-0” 

0’ 50’ 100’ 200’ 

Figure 4.3 Comparison of Existing and New Piers in Elevation 

4 - 6 


Figure 4.4 Comparison of Existing Inverted Pyramid Building and New St. Petersburg Pier 


COMPONENT DESCRIPTIONS 

Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 


Welcome Mat 

1.0 Architectural Description 

1.1 Located at the eastern terminus of the Uplands, the 

Welcome Mat is the place of public interface with 

the new Pier. The Welcome Mat consists of a traffic 

roundabout and a public piazza, the latter of which can 

accommodate a range of functions, from temporary 

farmer’s markets and street festivals to seasonal 

performances and civic celebrations. 

The Welcome Mat is also the location of intermodal 

exchange - the nexus point for pedestrians, cyclists, 

users of public transportation and private vehicles. 

The traffic roundabout at the end of 2nd Avenue NE 

facilitates the flow of traffic while also providing pickup 

and drop-off opportunities for the St. Petersburg 

Pier Trolley, Downtown Looper and other forms 

of ground transportation. The traffic roundabout 

connects the Welcome Mat with the Overwater Drive, 

allowing pedestrians, the Pier trolley and emergency 

vehicles onto to the Pier. The Welcome Mat is also 

directly connected to the Hub to the south, allowing 

unobstructed pedestrian flow to the Overwater Bridge, 

restrooms and planned retail and dining amenities. 

The Welcome Mat is accessible from 2nd Avenue NE, 

Spa Beach, the Hub, the Overwater Drive and the 

Overwater Bridge. The Welcome Mat responds to the 

Pier Advisory Task Force Report’s recommendation that 

“a drop-off/front door style experience for optimizing 

accessibility by way of cars,trolleys and/or other public 

transportation is important.”(Appendix H: Pier Advisory 

Task Force Report, p.12) 

1.2 Code References 

1.2.1 Risk Category: ASCE/SEI 24-05 

1.2.2 Wind Loads: ASCE 7-10 

1.2.3 Vehicular Design: AASHTO 

1.3 Dimensional Drivers 

1.4.1 Vertical Datum: NAVD88 

1.4.2 Total Area: 47,400 sq. ft. 

2.0 Welcome Mat Subcomponents 

2.1 Public Piazza 

2.1.1 The public piazza is a 25,600 sq. ft. paved area 

constructed on fill with porous paving elevated 

+8’-0” above MSL. 

2.1.2 The public piazza is designed to accommodate 

a range of temporary outdoor events from 

farmer’s markets to civic celebrations. 





Welcome Mat (continued) 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 


2.1.3 The public piazza is fully compliant with 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. 

2.2 Traffic Roundabout 

2.2.1 The traffic roundabout consists of a AASHTO 

compliant circular traffic feature paved with 

porous or sustainable paving. 

2.2.2 The traffic roundabout is designed to have 

a maximum turning radius of 80’-0” to 

accommodate emergency vehicles. 

3.0 Systems 

3.1 Mechanical – None 

3.2 Plumbing – None 

3.3 Electrical 

3.3.1 Code lighting will be provided throughout. 

3.3.2 High level pole lighting and low level bollard 

lighting will be provided with a sensitivity to 

overspill into the water. 

3.3.3 Electrical outlets will be embedded in the public 

piazza to supply power for temporary events. 

3.3.4 Electrical ground boxes will be coordinated 

with plug-in devices owned by the City’s Parks 

Department. 

3.4 Technology 

3.4.1 Wi-Fi will be provided at the Welcome Mat, as 

well as at all other project components. 

4 - 10 


LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.5 Welcome Mat Program Component and Related Subcomponents 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 


Hub 


1.1 Located immediately south of the Welcome Mat is 

the Hub. The Hub is intended as the main retail and 

dining attraction for the project, an Uplands destination 

that allows visitors to take in views of the new Pier 

and enjoy planned enhancements such as dining 

along the bay, a gift shop or other retail amenity. The 

Hub’s subcomponents consist of a program platform, 

restrooms and an elevated observation platform. Stubouts 

will be provided for a restaurant or similar amenity 

for future private development. This area is elevated 

out of the Coastal High Hazard Zone by the program 

platform, which can be expanded to accommodate the 

addition of new program elements. 

The Hub is accessible from the Welcome Mat and 

Second Avenue as well as from the Overwater Bridge 

via a large, accessible ramp to the west and a stair that 

extends from the observation platform to the south. 

Parking is provided by the existing Pelican Parking 

Lot. The Hub fulfills the recommendation of the Pier 

Advisory Task Force Report that programming of 

the new Pier should begin “as close to the Uplands 

as possible to provide a seamless connection to the 

City with comfortable walking distances,” as well as 

the recommendation that the program of the Pier 

be focused on restaurants and other food services 

(Appendix H: Pier Advisory Task Force Report, p. 1). 







2.0 Hub Subcomponents 

2.1 Program Platform 

2.1.1 The program platform is a 22,350 sq. ft. stepped 

concrete slab constructed on fill with precast 

concrete pavers elevated +9’-0” above MSL. 

2.1.2 The western edge of the program platform 

berms down into the Pelican Parking Lot. 

2.1.3 The program platform is the foundation for the 

observation platform and restrooms as well as 

a planned restaurant, retail space, storage area, 

and trash enclosure. 

2.1.4 The program platform is fully compliant with 


4 - 12 


LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.6 Hub Program Component and Related Subcomponents 





Welcome Mat 

Hub (continued) 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 


2.1.5 42” high aluminum guardrails will be provided 

where necessary. 

2.1.6 The program platform is designed to 

accommodate trash and delivery services. 

2.2 Observation Platform 

2.2.1 The observation platform consists of a 4,650 sq. 

ft. occupiable platform above the restrooms 

2.2.2 The observation platform provides the 

opportunity for views of the Lens, Tampa Bay 

and back to the St. Petersburg skyline. 

2.2.3 The observation platform is directly accessible 

from the Overwater Bridge and via a stair to the 

south of the platform. 


where necessary. 

2.3 Restrooms 

2.3.1 (2) Restrooms will be provided beneath the 

northern end of the observation platform; one 

for men and one for women. 

2.3.2 The men’s restroom will be outfitted with 2 

toilets and 2 urinals. The women’s restroom will 

be outfitted with 4 toilets. 

2.3.3 Hand washing stations will be located adjacent 

to the restrooms. 

2.3.4 Each restroom will be outfitted with an 

independent baby changing station. 

2.3.5 The restrooms shall also serve the Spa Beach. 

2.3.6 A beach shower will be provided adjacent to the 

restrooms. 

2.3.7 (2) Drinking fountains will be provided adjacent 


3.0 Systems 


3.2 Plumbing 

3.2.1 Potable water will be supplied for use at the 

restrooms. 

3.2.2 Wastewater removal will be required from the 

restrooms. 

3.2.3 Stub-outs for plumbing will be sized and 

provided for a planned restaurant and trash 

enclosure. 



3.3.2 Step lighting will be provided at the program 

platform. 

4 - 14 


3.3.3 General lighting and electrical hookups will be 

provided at the restrooms. 

3.3.4 High level pole lighting and low level bollard 

lighting will be provided with a sensitivity to 

overspill into the water. 

3.3.5 Stub-outs for electrical services will be provided 

for planned restaurant, retail, storage space and 

trash enclosure. 

3.3.6 A public address system for occupant 

notification and emergency warning will be 

provided. 


3.4.1 Wi-Fi will be provided at the Hub, as well as at 

all other project components. 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 




1.1 The Overwater Drive is the first of two central Pier 

structures that make up the new Pier. The Overwater 

Drive allows pedestrian, service vehicle and emergency 

vehicle access to the Marina and Promontory, extending 

from the northern end of the Welcome Mat east over the 

water to the Promontory. Along its length, two pathway 

balconies are provided for shade and relaxation. A 

tram stop that also serves as a turnout for emergency 

vehicles is provided adjacent to the Marina. The shading 

amenities on the Overwater Drive respond to the Pier 

Advisory Task Force’s recommendation of creating 

“comfortable and attractive pedestrian walkways and 

pathways” to ensure that “the Pier will remain a fully 

integrated experience into the existing fabric of the 

downtown urban core, park and waterfront” (Appendix 

H: Pier Advisory Task Force Report, p. 12). 




1.2.3 Vehicular Loading & Design: AASHTO HS-25 



1.4.2 Typical Width: 20’-0” 

1.4.3 Total Length: 1,455 ft. 


2.0 Overwater Drive Subcomponents 

2.1 Overwater Drive 

2.1.1 The Overwater Drive is a 20’-0” wide concrete 

deck structure elevated on piles and extending 

over the water. 

2.1.2 The top of the deck is 12’-0” above MSL. 

2.1.3 The top surface of the Overwater Drive is 

divided along its length into two coplanar 

surfaces - one 8’-0” wide wood-finish pedestrian 

surface and one 12”-0” wide concrete driving 

surface. 

2.1.4 The Overwater Drive is the central route for 

pedestrians and vehicles to the Promontory. 

2.1.5 The Overwater Drive can accommodate 

emergency vehicles weighing up to 50,000 lbs. 

2.1.6 The northern edge of the Overwater Drive 

features an undulating concrete curb with 

integrated aluminum guardrails. 

4 - 16 


LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.7 Overwater Drive Program Component and Related Subcomponents 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 

Overwater Drive (continued) 


Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 



throughout. 

2.2 Pathway Balconies 

2.2.1 The pathway balconies are 8’ deep, 120’ long, 

341 sq. ft. protrusions along the length of the 

Overwater Drive deck and Pier structure and will 

be finished with wood decking. 

2.2.2 The pathway balconies will serve as areas where 

individuals and groups can gather beneath the 

pathway balcony shade canopies, relax and 

enjoy the shade. 

2.2.3 (2) pathway balconies will be provided. 

2.2.4 Wood benches will be provided at the pathway 

balconies. 

2.2.5 42” aluminum handrails will be provided at the 

pathway balconies. 

2.3 Pathway Balcony Shade Canopies 

2.3.1 (2) pathway balcony shade canopies will be 

provided. 

2.3.2 The pathway balcony shade canopies are 280 

sq. ft. perforated metal shade structures over a 

tube-steel sub-structure. 

2.4 Emergency Turn-Out 

2.4.1 The emergency turnout is a 8’ deep, 120’ long, 

341 sq. ft. extension of the Overwater Drive 

deck and Pier structure finished with a concrete 

driving surface. 

2.4.2 The emergency turnout allows for vehicles on 

the Overwater Drive to pull out of the way of 

oncoming emergency vehicles. 

2.4.3 The emergency turnout is intended to serve as a 

stop for the Pier Tram. 

2.4.3 42” high aluminum guardrails will be provided at 

the emergency turnout. 

3.0 Systems 


3.2 Plumbing 

3.2.1 The Overwater Drive is the main conduit 

for all plumbing services to the Marina and 

Promontory. 

3.2.2 The Overwater Drive will house a 4” diameter 

sewage main and a 6” diameter domestic water 

main in a trench sized to accommodate an 

additional 4” diameter dry fire line in the future. 

4 - 18 




3.3.2 High level lighting will be provided. 

3.3.3 Step lighting will be provided where necessary. 

3.3.4 The Overwater Drive is the main conduit of all 

electrical services to the Marina, Promontory and 

Canopy. 


3.4.1 Wi-Fi will be provided at the Overwater Drive, as 

well as at all other project components. 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 




1.1 The Overwater Bridge is located opposite the Overwater 

Drive and is the project’s second central Pier element. 

Reserved for bikes and pedestrians, the Overwater 

Bridge is the main thoroughfare for individuals coming 

from the Marina and Promontory back towards the 

Hub and Welcome Mat on the Uplands. The Overwater 

Bridge consists of an elevated pathway supported 

by caissons extending over the water. The Overwater 

Bridge spans between the Promontory and the southern 

edge of the Hub, ramping up and over the Overwater 

Drive. The marina outlook (a shaded promenade with 

benches for sitting and boat watching) is located at the 

location where the Overwater Bridge curves around 

the Marina. The marina outlook also provides an ADA 

accessible route from the Overwater Bridge to the 

Overwater Drive and responds to the Pier Advisory Task 

Force’s recommendation of creating “comfortable and 

attractive pedestrian walkways and pathways” to ensure 

that “the Pier will remain a fully integrated experience 

into the existing fabric of the downtown urban core, park 

and waterfront” (Appendix H: Pier Advisory Task Force 

Report, p. 12). As the Overwater Bridge moves landward, 

it connects with the Hub’s observation platform and 

ramps down to the western portion of the Hub, 

providing an ADA thoroughfare and means of egress. 

Additional access is provided via a stair on the south of 

the observation platform. 




1.2.3 Pedestrian Pathway Design: AASHTO 



1.4.2 Typical Width: 10’-0” 

1.4.3 Total Length: 1,787 ft. 


2.0 Overwater Bridge Subcomponents 

2.1 Overwater Bridge 

2.1.1 The Overwater Bridge is a 10’-0” wide concrete 

deck structure elevated on caissons and 

extending over the water 

2.1.2 The top of the deck is 29’-0” above MSL 

2.1.3 The walking surface of the Overwater Bridge is 

concrete. 

4 - 20 


LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.8 Overwater Bridge Program Component and Related Subcomponents 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 


Overwater Bridge (continued) 

Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 


2.1.4 The Overwater Bridge is the main route for 

pedestrians from the Promontory to the 

Uplands. 

2.1.5 52” Aluminum guardrails will be provided on 

both sides of the Overwater Bridge. 

2.2 Marina Outlook 

2.2.1 The marina outlook is a sloping, 15’-0” to 18’-0 

wide concrete deck structure elevated on 

caissons and extending over the water, around 

the marina and connecting to the Overwater 

Drive. 

2.2.2 The walking surface of the marina outlook is 

concrete. 

2.2.3 The marina outlook has integrated wood 

benches. 

2.2.4 The marina outlook features an ADA accessible 

route along its eastern edge. 


on both sides of the marina outlook. 

2.3 Accessible Ramp 

2.3.1 The accessible ramp is a sloping, 10’-0” wide 

concrete deck structure at the terminus of the 

Overwater Bridge elevated on columns. 

2.3.2 The accessible ramp connects the Overwater 

Bridge to the Hub and Welcome Mat. 


on both sides of the accessible ramp. 

2.3.4 The accessible ramp is fully compliant with 


3.0 Systems 





3.3.2 Low level bollard type fixtures will be provided 

with a sensitivity to overspill into the surrounding 

water. 

3.3.3 Step lighting will be provided at the marina 

outlook. 


3.4.1 Wi-Fi will be provided at the Overwater Bridge, 

as well as at all other project components. 

4 - 22 



Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 


Lens Canopy 


1.1 Rising above the looped portions of the Overwater 

Bridge and Overwater Drive is the Lens Canopy. The 

Lens Canopy is the iconic element of the project, 

intended as the defining feature of the St. Petersburg 

waterfront. The soaring structure provides shade and 

creates a pleasant environment for pedestrians. In 

addition, the Lens Canopy functions as the armature for 

the bike path and overlook balconies. During special 

events the Lens Canopy can be dramatically illuminated 

or can function as a large projection surface for light 

shows, videos and other media. 

The bike path is a long, arcing ramp that connects the 

Overwater Drive to the Overwater Bridge by moving 

up through and onto the Lens Canopy. Embedded in 

the Lens Canopy’s surface are the overlook balconies. 

Accessed by an elevator and stair from the Promontory, 

these balconies are opportunities for incredible views of 

the skyline and the Bay. Both the bike path and overlook 

balconies are fully compliant with Americans with 

Disabilities (ADA) guidelines. The Lens Canopy satisfies 

the Pier Advisory Task Force’s recommendation that 

the new Pier function as an iconic structure. The Lens 

Canopy also fulfills the Task Force’s recommendation 

to incorporate pedestrian and bike trails into the 

design and to provide dramatic views back to the City 

(Appendix H: Pier Advisory Task Force Report, p.38). 




1.2.3 Bike & Pedestrian Pathway Design: AASHTO 



1.4.2 Total Canopy Area: 54,500 sq. ft. 

2.0 Lens Canopy Subcomponents 

2.1 Lens Canopy 

2.1.1 The Lens Canopy is a 54,500 sq. ft. metal 

structure clad in metal panels and supported on 

composite columns. 

2.1.2 The highest point of the Lens Canopy is +86’-0” 

MSL. 

2.1.3 The Lens Canopy is 4’ thick. 

2.1.4 The Lens Canopy is the iconic focal point of the 

project 




LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.9 Lens Canopy Program Component and Related Subcomponents 

4 - 24 


2.1.5 The Lens Canopy provides shade for areas of 

the Overwater Drive, Overwater Bridge and 

Promontory. 

2.2 Bike Path 

2.2.1 The bike path consists of a 10’ wide metalframed 

sloping pathway with concrete decking. 

2.2.2 The bike path will be designed according to 

AASHTO standards for mixed-use pathways. 

2.2.3 The bike path is a fully ADA accessible route and 

is intended to accommodate biking, jogging 

and other forms of active recreation. 


on both sides of the bike path. 

2.3 Overlook Balconies 

2.3.1 The overlook balconies are 6’ wide, metal 

framed balconies and catwalks with corrosionresistant 

expanded metal mesh decking. 


wherever necessary. 

2.3.3 The overlook balconies are accessible from the 

Promontory via an elevator or stairs. 

2.3.4 The overlook balconies are designed to provide 

visitors with incredible views of downtown St. 

Petersburg and Tampa Bay. 

2.4 Balcony Catwalks 

2.3.1 The balcony catwalks are 6’ wide, metal framed 

pathways with expanded metal decking that 

connect the balconies to the elevator and stair 

towers. 



3.0 Systems 




3.3.1 Architectural lighting will allow the top of the 

Canopy to be visible from the Uplands while 

allowing opportunities for light shows, movies, 

or a softly lit space. 

3.3.2 Lighting for special events will be provided. 

3.4 Technology – None 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy (continued) 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 


3.5 Sustainability 

3.5.1 The Canopy offers opportunities for sustainable 

measures to be integrated onto its skin 

to provide renewable energy and reduce 

overall operating costs. An integrated design 

approach will enhance the iconic appearance 

of the Canopy while also serving as a learning 

opportunity for young visitors. The third 

structural core of the Promontory may act as 

server for the opportunities below. 

3.5.1 Possible future integration of flexible 

photovoltaic panels 

3.5.2 Possible future integration of wind turbines 

3.5.3 Possible future integration of graywater 

collection system 

4 - 26 



Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 


Promontory 


1.1 Consisting of a rock-like platform that steps into the 

water, the Promontory serves as the experiential and 

programmatic apogee of the project. Constructed 

on top of the existing caissons and shaded by the 

Lens Canopy above, the Promontory accommodates 

a vehicular turn around, concessions space, learning 

steps and restrooms. Supplementing its formal program 

components, the Promontory is intended to be a place 

for special events, dances and other festivities. 

One of the most important functions of the Promontory 

is to get people closer to the experience of the water. 

To that end, promontory rocks form a stepped bayside 

landscape that provides ample seating and gathering 

space, allowing visitors to interact directly with the water. 

The promontory rocks will also feature a dedicated 

fishing area. To the west, the Learning Steps extend out 

into the center of the Lens and provide a space for field 

trips and tour groups to gather and learn about the bay. 

As the foundation for the elevator core, stair core and 

alternate elevator core, the Promontory also serves as 

the main connection to the Lens Canopy. 

The Promontory can be accessed directly from the 

Overwater Drive and Overwater Bridge and is fully ADA 

accessible. 




1.2.3 Bike & Pedestrian Pathway Design: AASHTO 




2.0 Promontory Subcomponents 

2.1 Promontory Deck 

2.1.1 The Promontory consists of a 18,050 sq. ft. 

concrete deck assembly supported on existing 

caissons. 

2.1.2 The Promontory is the foundation for the 

concessions space, restrooms, elevator core, 

stair core and alternate elevator core. 

2.1.3 The Promontory has a 35’-0” radius vehicular 

turnaround that can accommodate emergency 

vehicles and serves as the primary turnaround 

space for the Pier Trolley and the Downtown 

Looper. 




LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.10 Promontory Program Component and Related Subcomponents 

4 - 28 



Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory (continued) 

Lens Marina 




2.1.5 The Promontory deck is fully compliant with 


2.2 Promontory Rocks 

2.2.1 The promontory rocks are intended to replicate 

the experience of being on a rocky breakwater, 

allowing visitors the opportunity to sit and 

experience the water directly. 

2.2.2 The promontory rocks consist of 2,100 sq. ft. of 

floating, rock-like platforms supported on piles. 


wherever the promontory rocks will be 

accessible. 

2.2.4 The northern section of the promontory rocks 

will be dedicated to fishing. 

2.3 Concessions Space 

2.3.1 The 375 sq. ft. concessions space sells gelato, 

ice cream and other refreshments. 

2.3.2 The space will be fully equipped with HVAC, 

electrical, plumbing and sanitary hookups. 

2.3.3 The concessions space will feature bar-style 

seating. 

2.3.4 Additional seating can be accommodated 

beneath the Lens Canopy on the promontory 

rocks. 

2.3.5 Located south of the turnaround, space and 

utilities will be provided for a freestanding openair 

grill to allow for light cooking. 

2.3.6 Each column along the extended Promontory 

to the north will provide electrical hook-ups for 

food truck support. Additionally, every other 

column will provide services such as potable 

water and wastewater removal. 

2.4 Restrooms 

2.4.1 (2) restrooms will be provided on the northern 

end of the Promontory - one men’s and one 

women’s. 

2.4.2 The men’s restroom will be equipped with 2 

toilets and 2 urinals. The women’s restroom will 

be equipped with 4 toilets. 

2.4.3 Hand washing stations will be located adjacent 


2.4.4 Each restroom will be equipped with an 

independent baby changing station. 

2.4.5 (2) Drinking fountains will be provided adjacent 






Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 


Lens Marina 


2.5 Learning Steps 

2.5.1 The learning steps are a 1,850 sq. ft. cast in 

place amphitheater supported by an existing 

caisson. 

2.5.2 The learning steps will feature seating and 

accommodations for public lectures, school field 

trips, guided tours and other events. 


throughout. 

2.6 Elevator Core 

2.8.1 The elevator core will be a 13’-4” diameter castin-place 

concrete structural core. 

2.8.2 The elevator core will have a three-stop pistonlift 

elevator that bridges the Promontory and the 

Lens Canopy above. 

2.7 Stair Core 

2.9.1 The stair core will be constructed as a 14’-8” 

diameter cast-in-place concrete structural core. 

2.9.2 The stair core will have a cast in place pan stair. 

2.8 Alternate Structural Core 

2.9.1 The alternate structural core will be constructed 

as a 13’-4” diameter cast-in-place concrete 

structural core. 

2.9.2 The alternate structural core will be designed 

to accommodate maintenance storage and 

temporary services including A/V plug-in. 

Additionally, the area above-ground can be used 

for storing resources generated from possible 

sustainability measures. 

2.9.3 The alternate structural core’s primary purpose 

is to provide structural lateral support for the 

canopy framing. 

3.0 Systems 

3.1 Mechanical 

3.1.1 The concessions space will be equipped with a 

package air conditioning (AC) unit. 

3.2 Plumbing 

3.2.1 The concessions space will be provided with 

potable water and waste water removal. 

3.2.2 Stub outs for potable water and waste water 

removal will be provided and sized for a future 

open air grill, as well as in select locations along 

the Promontory for food trucks. 

3.2.3 Drainage will be provided for the elevator core 

and the stair core. 

4 - 30 



restrooms. 

3.2.2 Wastewater removal will be provided for the 

restrooms. 


3.3.1 Electrical service will be provided for the 

concessions space, restrooms, elevator core and 

stair core. 

3.3.2 General pedestrian lighting will be provided 

throughout. 

3.3.3 Additional architectural lighting will be provided 

throughout the Promontory. 

3.3.4 Emergency lighting will be provided where 

needed. 

3.3.5 Electrical outlets will be provided in specific 

columns along the southern end of the 

Promontory to accommodate special events. 

3.3.6 Step lighting will be provided at the learning 

steps. 


3.4.1 Wi-Fi will be provided at the Promontory, as well 

as at all other project components. 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 


Lens Marina 


Marina 


1.1 The Marina is a key component of the new Pier, 

offering a multitude of opportunities for water-based 

activities. The Marina will accommodate a range of 

non-motorized watercraft from kayaks, to paddle boats 

and stand-up paddle boards. The Marina consists of a 

modular floating dock approximately circular in shape. 

The floating dock has an integrated wave barrier that 

protects the interior of the Marina from Bay wind and 

waves. 

The Marina is accessible from the Overwater Drive via a 

pair of articulated, fully ADA compliant gang planks and 

from the Overwater Bridge via the arched stair. 

The floating dock will accommodate a series of planned 

enhancements: a concessions stand, bait shop and kayak 

rental facility among others. The marina bathrooms are 

located south of the Marina on the Overwater Drive. The 

Marina’s north-east side will also feature a dedicated 

fishing area. 


1.2.1 ASCE, 1994. Planning and Design Guidelines 

for Small Craft Harbours, ASCE Manual on 

Engineering Practice No. 50. New York: 

American Society of Civil Engineers, 291 p. 

1.2.2 NFPA 303 - Fire Protection Standard for Marinas 

and Boatyards 

1.2.3 PIANC, 1995. “Review of Selected Standards 

for Floating Dock Designs.” PIANC Sport & 

Pleasure Navigation Commission, September 

1995 

1.2.4 Tobiasson, B.O., and Kollmeyer, R.C., 2000. 

Marinas and Small Craft Harbours, Second 

Edition. Westviking Press, Medfield, MA. 

1.2.5 UFC-4-152-07 – Design: Small Craft Berthing 

Facilities (14 July 2009; Change 1, 1 September 

2012) 

1.2.6 Layout & Design Guidelines for Marina Berthing 

Facilities – California Department of Boating and 

Waterways, July 2005. 

1.3 Permitting Agencies 

1.3.1 US Army Corps of Engineers – Section 10 Rivers 

and Harbors Act 

1.3.2 US Army Corps of Engineers – Section 404 Clean 

Water Act 

1.3.3 SW Florida Water Management District – 

Environmental Resources Permit 

4 - 32 


LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.11 Marina Program Component and Related Subcomponents 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina (continued) 



Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency 

Determination 


Section 401 Clean Water Act Certification 

1.3.6 Pinellas County – Commercial and Multi-Use 

Dock Permit 

1.3.7 City of St. Petersburg – Building Permit 


1.4.1 All dimensions in relationship to N 23 

1.4.2 Vertical Datum = NAVD88 

1.4.3 Total Area = 9,150 sq. ft. 

2.0 Marina Subcomponents 

2.3 Restrooms 

2.3.1 There are (4) restroom stations. 

2.3.2 The restrooms are located to the south of the 

Marina on the Overwater Drive. 

2.3.2 Each restroom station will be equipped with (1) 

toilet and (1) lavatory. 

2.3.3 A baby changing station will be provided in each 

restroom. 

2.5 Floating Dock 

2.5.1 The total area of the floating dock is 9,150 sq. ft. 

2.5.2 The floating dock will likely be a proprietary 

product made from combinations of concrete, 

marine grade aluminum, and composite plastics. 

Durability of the floating docks shall be at least 

25 years as per international accepted standards 

for these products. 

2.5.3 The deck surface of the floating dock will be of 

treated timber construction. 

2.5.4 Access to the floating dock during all tide 

cycles requires articulated gangways. Gangway 

structures will be marine grade aluminum and 

have a maximum slope of 3H:1V for safe access 

at mean low water (MLW). The design load of 

the gangway platform is 100 psf for the structural 

load and 50 psf for the load transferred to float 

plus the dead load of the gangway. All gangway 

transition plates and handrails will comply 

with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 

requirements. The elevation of the gangway 

access platforms will be above the design high 

water level (100-year event). 

4 - 34 


2.5.5 All utilities will run in a trench around the floating 

dock forming a basic utility spine. As the Marina 

expands, utilities can be plugged into this basic 

system. 

2.5.6 A dedicated fishing area is located on the northeast 

side of the Marina 

2.6 Arched Stair 

2.6.1 The arched stair is the gateway to the Marina 

and has a maximum opening of 50 ft. wide. At its 

highest point, the bottom surface of the arched 

stair is 20 ft. above mean sea level. The sides of 

the structure step up as they form the arch. 

2.6.2 The arched stair is 6 ft. wide, and has 40 steps 

from the wave wall deck to the intersection 

between the arched stair and the Overwater 

Bridge. 

2.6.3 The top of the arched stair will be fixed to the 

Overwater Bridge with the bottom of the stair 

resting on the floating dock. The arched stair will 

be articulated to account for tidal change. 

2.6.4 The arched stair will be constructed of 

aluminum. 

2.6.5 The walls of the arched stairs will be clad in 

wood with aluminum guardrails provided on 

both sides. 

2.6.6 The arched stair will have step lights on the 

stairs and side warning lights for watercraft. 

3.0 Systems 


3.2 Plumbing 


restrooms. 

3.2.2 Wastewater removal will be required from the 

restrooms. 

3.2.3 Hook ups for sanitary and domestic water will be 

provided for the floating dock. 


3.3.1 Low level fixtures will be provided at the floating 

dock. 

3.3.2 Step lighting will be provided at the arched stair. 

3.3.3 Hook ups for electrical will be provided at the 

floating dock 

3.4 Technology – None 

3.4.1 Wi-Fi will be provided at the Lens Marina, as well 

as at all other project components. 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 



1.0 Description 

1.1 The future Underwater Feature can become an exciting 

attraction to the Lens and an important resource for 

the bay and the community. After gathering significant 

information from technical workshops, research and 

meetings with individuals in the marine community, the 

design team remains excited about the possibilities for 

an Underwater Feature as a part of the Lens and the 

potential benefits it will bring to the community. Before 

a basis of design for this feature can be established, 

further in-depth study and specific research will be 

needed to evaluate feasibility, impacts and benefits 

on environmental, cost and community levels. The 

Underwater Feature is intended to function as a 

framework supporting future habitat enhancement by 

the local scientific community, potentially funded by 

grants or future city funds. 

1.2 Permitting Agencies 

1.2.1 US Army Corp of Engineers 

1.2.2 Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

1.2.3 Southwest Florida Water Management District 

1.2.4 Pinellas County 

1.3 Additional Agencies and Organizations that may provide 

comments 

1.3.1 Tampa Bay Estuary Program 

1.3.2 Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council 

1.3.3 Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

1.3.4 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission 

1.3.5 Save the Manatee 

1.3.6 US Environmental Protection Agency 

1.3.7 National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration 

1.3.8 National Marine Fisheries 

1.4 Permits 

1.4.1 An application for an Environmental Resource 

Permit from the State and Federal government 

has been submitted and is currently in progress. 

The granting of the permit is dependent upon 

the feature’s impacts, the proposed mitigation 

of these impacts and the relative value of 

existing conditions versus the proposed project. 

If proposed changes are significant, the future 

Underwater Feature may require additional 

studies for this permit. 

4 - 36 


LENS CANOPY 

WELCOME MAT 

OVERWATER 

BRIDGE 

LENS MARINA 

PROMONTORY 

HUB 

OVERWATER 

DRIVE 

UNDERWATER 

FEATURE 

Figure 4.12 Underwater Feature Program Component and Related Subcomponents 





Welcome Mat 

Hub 



Lens Canopy 

Promontory 

Lens Marina 

Underwater Feature (continued) 

1.5 Data gathering 

1.5.1 Structural, geotechnical, scientific and cost 

analysis will be necessary. Educational studies 

will evaluate how the feature can be introduced 

into local curricula. Marketing and business 

studies will evaluate how the feature can 

function as a St. Petersburg attraction. 

1.5.2 A detailed benthic study needs to be 

performed to document the existing habitat. 

The permitting agency, design team and 

an environmental fieldwork consultant will 

develop and agree upon the scope of the study, 

which may include topics such as seasonal 

observations or observations of varying 

durations. 

1.5.3 The design team is cautiously investigating the 

capacity of existing piles to remain in place 

so that they may become a component of the 

Underwater Feature. Thorough investigation and 

structural analysis will be needed to accurately 

assess their condition and to determine their 

structural suitability. 

2.0 Possible Subcomponents 

2.1 When additional environmental, geotechnical, 

structural, and technical data becomes available, 

subcomponents will be studied for system compatibility 

and for sensitivity to the habitat. All construction and 

introduction of new components will follow Florida Fish 

and Wildlife manatee protection construction guidelines 

and manatee exclusion devices guidelines. The goal 

is to minimize the impact to existing habitats while 

maximizing diversity. 

2.2 Artificial reef construction components (possibilities 

include the existing piles, reef balls and concrete 

culverts) 

2.3 Lighting equipment and systems 

2.4 Acoustical equipment and systems 

2.5 Digital camera/imaging equipment and systems 

2.6 Linkages to internet, remote access and monitoring 

2.7 Solar power equipment and systems 

2.8 Components to allow docent-led tours by kayak or boat 

4 - 38 


5BASIS 

OF DESIGN 

CONCEPT ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION 

The purpose of this section is to describe, through drawings, 

diagrams and descriptive analysis, the new St. Petersburg Pier. 

The following is a list of drawings appearing in the section, the 

pagination of which refers to the complete drawing set. 

• A0-00 Cover Sheet 

• A0-52 Existing Pier Plan 

• A0-53 Existing Structure Plan 

• A0-54 Existing Pier/Proposed Pier Plan 

• A1-00 Site Plan 

• A2-01 Marina Plan 

• A2-02 Overwater Drive Plan 

• A2-03 Overwater Bridge Plan 

• A2-04 Balcony Plan 

• A2-05 Canopy Plan 

• A3-01 Elevations 

1 / North Elevation 

2 / South Elevation 

3 / East Elevation 

• A4-01 Sections 

1 / Longitudinal Section 

2 / Transverse Section 

• A4-02 Upland Sections 

1 / Upland East-West Section 

2 / Upland North-South Section 

• A4-03 Drive, Bridge & Canopy Sections 

1 / Bike Path - Lens Canopy 

2 / Promontory - Lens Canopy 

3 / Overwater Drive Section 

4 / Alt. Overwater Drive Section 

5 / Alt. Overwater Drive Pile Cap Section 

6 / Overwater Bridge Section 

• A4-04 Marina Sections 

1 / Marina Entrance Section 

2 / Typ. Floating Dock Section 


• A5-10 Enlarged Hub Plan 

• A5-11 Enlarged Marina Plan 

• A5-12 Enlarged Promontory Plan 

• A5-13 Underwater Feature Plan 

• A5-14 Promontory Double “T” Beam Layout Plan 

• A5-30 Enlarged Elevator Plans and Section 

1 / Promontory Level Plan 

2 / Balcony Level 1 Plan 

3 / Roof Plan 

4 / Hoistway Section 

• A9-01 Guardrail Details 

1 / Guardrail Type A Section 

2 / Guardrail Type B Section 

3 / Guardrail Type C Section 

4 / Guardrail Type D Section 



5 BASIS OF DESIGN CONCEPT ANALYSIS 

ENGINEERING NARRATIVE 

Marine Work 

The design team has preliminarily identified potential supports 

for the new Pier elements, which include new piles and caissons, 

as well as selective reuse of the existing caissons supporting 

the Inverted Pyramid building. Actual design of foundations 

for the Pier will begin following execution of the geotechnical 

exploration program and more precise site-specific evaluation of 

wind and wave loads during the next stage of work. At this early 

phase, the engineers believe the following foundation types 

would be viable options: 

• Overwater Drive – A three-pile pier system, with one 

vertical and two batter piles supporting pile caps spaced 

at approximately 60’, could support the roadway/ 

walkway. The pile type could be a precast 18” square 

concrete pile driven into place. 

• Overwater Bridge – Single large diameter (estimated at 

48”) caissons spaced at 100’ could support the relatively 

narrow structure. The caisson would be a steel shell 

drilled into the bay bottom and filled with concrete. 

• The Promontory, Lens Canopy, and related decking 

would be supported by a series of pile caps custom 

poured to match the varying horizontal surface area. 

Again, precast 18” square piles could be used, although 

some areas may need 20” piles, and the stair may use 

drilled steel pipe piles with concrete fill. The design 

team has examined reconfiguration of the Promontory 

layout to engage the existing caissons presently 

supporting the Inverted Pyramid building. 

Structural Approach 

The design team has preliminarily identified potential 

superstructures for the new Pier elements. Actual design of 

these structures will begin following a more precise site-specific 

evaluation of wind and wave loads, but at this early phase, the 

engineers believe the following superstructure types would be 

viable options: 

• Overwater Drive and Overwater Bridge – Precast beams 

are appropriate for construction of what are essentially 

bridges over water. The design team consulted the PCI 

Manual and identified several standard shapes which 

would function well for the 60’ span of the Overwater 

Drive and the 100’ span of the Overwater Bridge. Precast 

box beams and standard tees were sketched as options 

for the structural concept plans. Further discussions led 

by the Construction Manager revealed that Florida tee 

beams and/or double tees could be more economical 

due to local availability. Further investigation and design 

will be conducted in the next design phase to select the 

optimal precast beam shape. A concrete slab would be 

placed atop the beams and extend past the edges of 

the beam to form the full width of structure and support 

the edge railings. The superstructures may receive a 

cladding for aesthetic purposes. 

5 - 2 


• Promontory – the Promontory and related decking 

would consist of similar precast beams supporting a cast 

in place deck. In some areas where the Promontory is 

planned to “step down” into the Bay, the engineers will 

investigate the placement of large unreinforced concrete 

block on piles driven below the tidal zone, both to help 

absorb wave forces and to avoid placing reinforcing bar 

in the tidal zone. 

• Lens Canopy – the Canopy will consist of a galvanized 

steel and concrete support structure onto which 

prefabricated panels will be affixed. The design team 

has investigated concrete and aluminum panels. 

Aluminum panels may present advantages of less weight 

and easier placement onto the structure. 

• Various protection strategies for structural steel and 

reinforcing steel were discussed during the BOD 

phase. Structural steel would be protected either 

by galvanization or a three- or four coat protective 

coating (paint) system which would consist of a zinc-rich 

primer, two epoxy mid-coats and a urethane top coat if 

exposed. Cathodic protection can also be considered for 

protecting steel reinforcing bar, and such components 

as steel sheet piling. Cathodic protection can consist 

of sacrificial systems, where such components as zinc 

or magnesium are place in strategic locations to serve 

as an (positive) anode to absorb stray electrons, or 

active systems, where low voltage (approximately 40 

V) impressed currents are placed within the steel and 

connected to a grounding system to attract away stray 

electrons. For assured protection, repainting may need 

to occur once every 15 years. 

• In all structures, low maintenance and corrosion- and 

UV-resistant materials designed for aggressive marine 

environments will be specified. 

Site Work 

The Hub on the Uplands will require site work to create an 

appropriate entryway to the Pier. Work will include new paving, 

lighting, planting and restoration of the areas occupied by the 

existing Pier. 

Utilities 

The project needs to provide utility services for the new Pier and 

Hub elements. This will include water for potable use and fire 

protection, electrical service and natural gas. A propane system 

will be investigated for the Promontory area in lieu of providing 

a gas service from the Uplands. A sanitary sewer ejector system 

will originate at the Promontory and discharge into the existing 

Uplands sanitary system. Modifications will be made to the 

existing storm system. 


BASIS OF DESIGN CONCEPT 

PLANS AND DIAGRAMS 

A0-00 

Cover Sheet 






A0-52 

Existing Pier Plan 

0 37’ 75’ 150’ 300’ 

5 - 6 


A0-53 

Existing Structure Plan 

0 37’ 75’ 150’ 300’ 






A0-54 

Pile Overlay Plan 

0 37’ 75’ 150’ 300’ 

5 - 8 


A1-00 

Site Plan 

0 62’ 125’ 250’ 500’ 






A2-01 

Marina Plan 

0 37’ 75’ 150’ 300’ 

5 - 10 


A2-02 

Overwater Drive Plan 

0 37’ 75’ 150’ 300’ 






A2-03 

Overwater Bridge Plan 

0 37’ 75’ 150’ 300’ 

5 - 12 


A2-04 

Balcony Plan 

0 37’ 75’ 150’ 300’ 






A2-05 

Canopy Plan 

0 37’ 75’ 150’ 300’ 

5 - 14 


A3-01 

Elevations 

1 / North Elevation 

0 

25’ 

50’ 

100’ 

200’ 

A3-01 

Elevations 

2 / South Elevation 

0 

25’ 

50’ 

100’ 

200’ 

A3-01 

Elevations 

3 / East Elevation 

0 

25’ 

50’ 

100’ 

200’ 






A4-01 

Sections 

1 / Longitudinal Section 

0 

12’ 

25’ 

50’ 

100’ 

A4-01 

Sections 

2 / Transverse Section 

0 

12’ 

25’ 

50’ 

100’ 

5 - 16 


A4-02 

Upland Sections 

1 / Upland East-West Section 

0 

10’ 

20’ 

40’ 

80’ 

A4-02 

Upland Sections 

2 / Upland North-South Section 

0 

10’ 

20’ 

40’ 

80’ 






A4-03 

Drive, Bridge and Canopy Sections 

1 / Bike Path - Lens Canopy 

A4-03 


2 / Promontory - Lens Canopy 

0 5’ 10’ 20’ 40’ 

0 5’ 10’ 20’ 

40’ 

5 - 18 


A4-03 


3 / Overwater Drive Section 

A4-03 


5 / Alt. Overwater Drive Pile Cap Section 

0 

3’ 

6’ 

12’ 

0 

3’ 

6’ 

12’ 

A4-03 


4 / Alt. Overwater Drive Section 

A4-03 


6 / Overwater Bridge Section 

0 

3’ 

6’ 

12’ 

0 

3’ 

6’ 

12’ 






A4-04 

Marina Sections 

1 / Marina Entrance Section 

0 

5’ 

10’ 

20’ 

40’ 

A4-04 



A4-04 



0 5’ 10’ 20’ 40’ 0 5’ 10’ 20’ 

40’ 

5 - 20 


A5-10 

Enlarged Hub Plan 

0 12’ 25’ 50’ 100’ 






A5-11 

Enlarged Marina Plan 

0 12’ 25’ 50’ 

5 - 22 


A5-12 

Enlarged Promontory Plan 

0 12’ 25’ 50’ 






A5-13 

Underwater Feature Plan 

0 5’ 10’ 20’ 40’ 

5 - 24 


A5-14 

Promontory Double “T” Beam Layout Plan 

0 12’ 25’ 50’ 






A5-30 

Enlarged Elevator Plans and Sections 

3 / Roof Plan 

A5-30 


4 / Hoistway Section 

0 

5’ 

10’ 

20’ 

0 

5’ 

10’ 

20’ 

A5-30 


2 / Balcony Level 1 Plan 

0 

5’ 

10’ 

20’ 

A5-30 


1 / Promontory Level Plan 

0 

5’ 

10’ 

20’ 

5 - 26 


A9-01 

Guardrail Details 

1 / Guardrail Type A Section 

A9-01 


3 / Guardrail Type C Section 

0 3” 6” 1’ 0 3” 6” 

1’ 

A9-01 


2 / Guardrail Type B Section 

A9-01 


4 / Guardrail Type D Section 

0 3” 6” 1’ 0 3” 6” 

1’ 


6CONSTRUCTION 

MANAGER AT 

RISK: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

COST ESTIMATE PROCESS 

The process in which Skanska, the A/E team, and key 

representatives of the City of St. Petersburg have engaged 

in over the past months has been intensive, thorough, and 

collaborative. Since July 21 st , 2012, the day that Skanska was 

recommended as the Construction Manager for the project, the 

process has been based on real time costing and constructability 

concepts. By reaching out to the A/E team, developing a 

collaborative process and keeping all lines of communication 

open, Skanska was successful not only in describing a project 

that can be built on budget and on schedule, but also in 

developing a framework that will allow the team to take on any 

challenges that may arise as the project moves forward. 

This process has involved the following: 

• (7) Cost Estimates or Rough Order of Magnitudes 

• (3) Revised 3D cost models which were utilized to 

capture true quantities for accurate estimates 

• (4) Face-to-face multi-day work sessions that included 

the A&E team, the client, and collaborative experts 

contributing real time pricing and constructability input 

• Over a dozen internal meetings with our collaborative 

experts 

• (7+) all hands on deck conference calls to discuss data 

as it developed, allowing the team to mutually identify 

opportunities worthy of exploring 

• Several remote 3D collaborative interface meetings that 

functioned as tutorials of the 3D project as it developed, 

allowing both the A/E team and the construction team 

to be fully aware of changes as they occurred, thereby 

rendering the data necessary for costing immediately 

accessible (Figure 6.1). 

Through this immersive process the cost estimate developed is 

complete. Because decisions made during BOD are not final, the 

architects, engineers and builders of this project look forward 

to continuing the process described here, and to engaging the 

City and the community in the next phases of work. Through 

a process of fine-tuning, confirming and making adjustments 

where necessary, the project will be realized on budget and on 

schedule. 

This following pages of the BOD Report outline Skanska’s 

engagement with local businesses, small business enterprises, 

minority and women owner enterprises, as well as the general 

Tampa Bay community. This section also includes a preliminary 

schedule for the project. A detailed cost model, prepared by 

Skanska with the A/E team, appears as Appendix M, while a Cost 

Summary is included in the Executive Summary of this Report, on 

page 2-10. 



6 IMPLEMENTATION AND COST MODEL 

Figure 6.1 Screenshots of 3D Model Used for Costing 

6 - 2 





LOCAL BUSINESS 

ENTERPRISE PARTICIPATION 

Local Business Enterprise Participation 

Understanding the importance of investing in local communities 

and promoting the use of local businesses is one of the keys to 

Skanska’s success. The team intends to maximize participation of 

local and SBEs at all levels of the new Pier project, including, but 

not limited to: 

• Step 1: Skanska’s SBE Partner 

The first step of including Local Business Enterprises was 

made with the partnership between Skanska and Ward 

Construction, a City of St. Petersburg based construction 

firm. This union represents only the beginning of the 

team’s proactive initiative to optimize local Pinellas 

County businesses and SBE participation. Skanska Ward 

is committed to creating a sustainable economic impact 

for Pinellas County during and after the realization of the 

new Pier. 

• Step 2: Community Outreach to Construction Trade 

Subcontractors 

The Skanska team’s history of outperforming owner 

expectations and goals for local participation at 

the trade level is evidenced by the achievements 

of many projects, the direct result of a strategic 

outreach program that builds relationships with local 

subcontractors. For the new Pier, outreach efforts will 

have a focused target on local St. Petersburg and 

Pinellas County businesses. 

• Step 3: Workforce / Labor Force 

Recognizing the unique opportunity for job creation 

resulting from this effort, the Skanska team is taking 

proactive steps to ensure that all efforts are made to hire 

locally on this project. 

6 - 4 


SBE/MWBE Outreach Approach 

Since opening its Tampa office nearly 20 years ago, Skanska’s 

success in the community has been in part due to a commitment 

to incorporate diversity as one of the company’s core values. 

Skanska’s strategies for proactive outreach to small business 

enterprises and minority and women owner enterprises (SBE/ 

MWBE) have consistently positioned its Owners to outperform 

their small business participation goals. As a result, strong 

relationships within the small business/minority communities 

throughout Pinellas and Hillsborough counties have been 

established. The success of Skanska’s program is built on an 

understanding of the capabilities and specific scope assigned 

to each SBE/MWBE firm, enabling Skanska to effectively match 

capable small businesses with the right opportunity, thereby 

positioning them for success. While many construction firms 

simply utilize SBE/MWBEs at the subcontractor level, Skanska 

includes a SBE as part of its prime team, working in association 

with Ward Construction and Remodeling to create the 

Skanska|Ward Team. 

The goal for the new Pier is to utilize the economic impact 

of the project to benefit local St. Petersburg/Pinellas County 

communities and to grow reliable small/minority and women 

owned businesses. Skanska promotes the long term viability of 

SBE/MWBE businesses through a proven, proactive approach 

that maximizes inclusion and participation on all projects. 

Skanska|Ward will focus on relationship building through 

rigorous, personalized outreach activities that will closely align 

with the City’s program. 

Following research on the City of St. Petersburg’s Business 

Assistance Division and Small Business Enterprise program, it 

has been concluded that Skanska’s approach and performance 

history is greatly aligned with the City’s objectives in regard 

to the means and methods for obtaining the best SBE/ 

MWBE participation results. In furtherance of this research, 

Skanska|Ward visited the City of St. Petersburg Purchasing 

Department and spoke with Louis Moore, Director of the 

department, as well as the Business Assistance Division. 

The following list summarizes the Small Business Luncheons 

and related sponsored events organized by Skanska over the 

past three years. These events, coupled with other outreach 

and development tools, are recognized throughout the Tampa 

Bay community as evidence of Skanska’s commitment to the 

development of small businesses: 

• 10/05/2012: Construction Management Building Blocks 

Training Program - Learn how to successfully do business 

with Skanska 

• 6/21/2011: Meet and Greet with local Brevard County 

subs for upcoming work at Port Canaveral 






(continued) 



with Skanska 

• 3/01/2011: Bay Pines VA Inpatient/Outpatient 

Improvements and Mental Health Addition, St. 

Petersburg, FL 

• 1/10/2011: 2011 Opportunities for Small Businesses 

- Featured Project: New US Federal Office Building, 

Miramar, FL 

• 7/29/2010: Small Business Tools and Strategies for 

Success in the Federal Market 



with Skanska 

• 5/12/2009: Risk Management Strategies for Small 

Businesses - Skanska Bonding and Subguard Program 

• 9/22/2009: Today’s Market Conditions and Updates 

Outreach, Recruitment and participation of SBE/MWBE 

programs 

One of Skanska’s most successful outreach programs is the Small 

Business Luncheon held several times annually. The “lunch and 

learn” format features a topic of interest to the small business 

community. Topics can include trends in construction, bonding, 

financing, risk management and upcoming bid opportunities. 

The key note speakers for these meetings are a combination of 

Skanska executives and leaders from small business agencies 

and associations. The table Figure 6.2 provides a summary of 

the Small Business Luncheons and related sponsored events by 

Skanska over the past three years. 

5-Step Approach 

Skanska’s track record of outperforming Owner expectations for 

in construction, bonding, financing, risk management and upcoming bid opportunities. The key note speakers are a 

small combination MWBE of Skanska executives participation as well as leaders on from every local small project business agencies is a and direct associations. result of 

the 5-step approach. Skanska’s 5-step approach has been the 

The following table provides a summary of the Small Business Luncheons and related sponsored events by Skanska over the 

foundation past three years. These of events MWBE coupled with programs other outreach and nationwide. development tools are Skanska’s recognized throughout approach 

the Tampa 

Bay community and are evidence of Skanska’s commitment to the development of small businesses. 

is customized and tailored to reflect the unique dynamics of 

Note: The pictures along the bottom of the Recent Outreach Events Table are of two separate outreach events in which John 

each project and each individual community. Participation levels 

consistently The Skanska exceed | Ward projected Team’s goals Five and Step promote Approach the long term 

viability to Reaching and economic Participation success of Goals MWBE firms. 

Step 

5 


1 

Proactive Outreach 

Dynamic Database 

Strategic Alliances 

with Local Agencies 

Matchmaking with 

larger contractors 


2 

Reduced Barrier 

Strategies 

Bid Package analysis 

Prequalification 

& Certification 

Assistance 


3 

Preliminary Bid 

meetings 

Bid notifications 

Technical Assistance 

Post Bid Results 


4 

Preconstruction 

Meetings 

Progress Meetings 

Payment Schedules 

and audits 

SBE/MWBE Tracking 

& Monitoring 

Post-Project debrief 

Identify future 

collaborations 

Ongoing 

communication 

6 - 6 

Clark and OT Delancy (both proposed team members) were key note speakers. 


Proven 5-Step Approach 

Skanska’s track record for outperforming Owner expectations for small, MWBE participation on every project is a direct 

result of our proven 5-step approach. Skanska’s 5-step approach has been the foundation of MWBE programs nationwide. 

Our approach is customized and tailored to reflect the unique dynamics of each project and each individual community. 

The end result is the same –participation levels consistently exceed projected goals and promote the long term viability and

Proof of Recent Outreach Success 


ISA, Tampa, FL 

Project Owner/Name and Location 


Sundome and Convocation Center, Tampa, FL 

Clay County School Board 

Shadowlawn Elementary, Green Cove Springs, Florida 

Clay County School Board 

Oakleaf Elementary, Green Cove Springs, Florida 

Duval County School Board 

Bartram Springs Elementary, Jacksonville, Florida 

State of Florida Department of Veteran Affairs 

FDVA Nursing Home, St. Augustine, Florida 

Gainesville Regional Utilities 

Operations Center, Gainesville, Florida 

H. Lee Moffitt Research Cancer Center and Research Institute 

International Plaza Outpatient Facility, Tampa, Florida 

Broward Board of County Commissioners 

Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport 

Terminal 4 Expansion, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 

Broward Board of County Commissioners 

Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport 

Terminal 4 Expansion, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 

School Board of Broward County 

Heron Heights Elementary School, Parkland, Florida 

University of Central Florida 

Health and Public Affair Building, Orlando, Florida 

School Board of Broward County 

Liberty Elementary School, Margate, Florida 

Florida International University 

Frost Art Museum, Miami, Florida 

General Services Administration 

United States Courthouse, Jacksonville, Florida 

City of Orlando 

City of Orlando Operations Center, Orlando, Florida 

Orange County Public Schools 

Colonial High School, Orlando, Florida 

(*) Denotes projects where no participation requirements were set 

Required 

Participation 

Actual Participation 

0%* 15% 

0%* 14% 

0%* 32% 

0%* 30% 

20% 29% 

20% 33% 

0%* 23% 

15% 48% 

30% 42% 

24% 29% 

0%* 20% 

30% 35% 

0%* 42% 

0%* 22% 

25% 25% 

25% 27% 

20% 36% 

Figure 6.2 Small Business Luncheons and Related Sponsored Events by Skanska 






(continued) 

Training Programs 

To further assist MWBE partners, Skanska has developed a 

formal Mentor-Protégé Program and Construction Management 

Building Blocks (CMBB) Program. These programs are available 

for any Skanska project. 

Mentor-Protégé Program 

Under Skanska’s Mentor-Protégé Program, an appropriate 

MWBE contractor is selected to be mentored throughout a 

project, exposing the firm to the level of service expected by 

Skanska’s clients and assisting the firm in gaining experience 

without financial risk. The MWBE contractor assists Skanska 

during preconstruction through review of bid packages and the 

identification of capable minority and/or woman-owned firms 

within the local area. During construction, the firm provides 

project engineers or assistant supervisors to work under the 

tutelage of Skanska’s on-site staff. 

Construction Management Building Blocks (CMBB) Program 

Skanska offers CMBB, a training course available throughout 

the country, both in conjunction with a specific project and as 

a stand-alone. The philosophy behind CMBB is to share the 

extensive industry expertise of Skanska’s employees with small 

and emerging companies. The eight-week program addresses 

topics that are traditionally challenging for contractors including 

Accounting for Construction, How to Structure a Joint Venture, 

Estimating and more. Material is taught through lecture, group 

discussions and hands-on demonstrations of proven business 

practices. Course materials are presented by internal and 

external Skanska subject matter experts. 

History of Success 

Skanska’s Contractor Diversity Program has proven successful 

through the use of strategic joint ventures, partnering and 

mentoring programs with the MWBE community. Skanska 

is recognized as one of the most progressive Construction 

Management firms in the nation in promoting MWBE 

participation, particularly on large private, public or semi-public 

projects. 

Skanska’s award-winning Diversity Business Enterprise Program is 

an integral component of its organizational culture. Additionally, 

Skanska has won numerous awards in the past few years for its 

minority participation including the 2008 Corporate Member of 

the Year - United Minority Contractors, 2007 Circle of Influence 

Diversity Award, 2007 Contractor of the Year from the Minority 

Business Opportunities Committee, Hispanic Contractors 

Association of Georgia Contractor of the Year Award and 

Oregon Association of Minority Entrepreneurs Construction 

Industry Award 2008. 

6 - 8 


Strategy and Tactical Approach for the City of St. 

Petersburg Pier Replacement Project 

Skanska|Ward will engage the City of St. Petersburg Purchasing 

and Business Assistance Division regarding the following: 

• Host a SBE networking event to maximize local 

economic impact 

• Begin pre-qualification of SBE’s firm, which supports 

their bonding and encourages participation 

• Break down the project and identify the various 

components for review and availability of SBE inclusion 

• Establish SBE participation goals for the project 

• Begin developing strategic bid packages 

• Facilitate partnerships between large primary and SBE 

subcontractors 

• Conduct workshops to deliver detailed information 

containing clear instructions for participation 

• Closely monitor the work of SBE firms’ prime and lower 

tiers to ensure their success. 

• Maintain project status log that identifies all of the SBE 

firms’ performance and payments 

• Document the entire process so that the City of St. 

Petersburg may utilize the model going forward 






(continued) 

Local Experience 

Skanska has been the premier builder of the Tampa Bay 

area’s most significant projects for the past 20 years. With St. 

Petersburg as its home, the team has worked on both sides of 

the Bay. Figure 6.3 lists several significant projects that have 

been built by Skanska. Skanska’s commitment to the local 

community is exemplified by the expertise and history of its 

employees, many of whom are native to the Tampa Bay Area. 

The following are key local team members; resumés containing 

detailed information on their experience and qualifications can 

be found in Appendix J: Skanska - Key Personnel. 

• Chuck Jablon, Project Executive, Account Manager and 

Point-of-Contact 

• Roger Stephan, LEED AP, Executive Support 

• OT Delancy, Executive Support - SBE/MWBE Liaison 

• William Flemming, CEO - Executive Support 

• Mark McLaughlin, LEED AP, Senior Project Manager - 

Crown and Pathways Construction 

• Meoi Plummer, Project Manager - Crown and Pathways 

Construction 

• Richard Lee, Superintendent/Quality Control - Crown 

and Pathways Construction 

• Tommy Ward, Superintendent/Quality Control - Crown 

and Pathways Construction 

• Patrick McGlynn, Superintendent/Quality Control - 

Marine Construction 

• Jake Krehbiel, LEED AP, Assistant Project Manager - 

Crown and Pathways Construction 

• Christina Huber, LEED AP, BIM Manager 

• Brian Coakley, Preconstruction Support 

• Mark Apaliski, Preconstruction 

• Steve Arsht, Preconstruction Support 

• Robert Ward, Local SBE/MWBE 

• David Espy, Environmental, Health and Safety Manager 

Skanska has 202 total employees in its Tampa office. 163 live in 

the Tampa Bay Area; 15 live in the City of St. Petersburg; 24 live 

in Pinellas County. Figure 6.4 describes these employees’ areas 

of residence. 

6 - 10 


1 

BayCare Corporate 

Offices 

2 

Pinellas County Florida 

Botanical Gardens 

3 

Interstate 275 

Expansion 

4 

St. Anthony’s Carillon 

Outpatient Center 

5 

Bayfront Medical 

Center MOB and 

Parking Garage 

6 

Tropicana Field 

Renovation 

7 Tampa International 8 SR 60 TIA Expansion 9 100 North Tampa 

Airport Airside “E” 

Delta Terminal 

10 Tampa General 11 Curtis Hixon 

12 Tampa Museum of Art 

Hospital West Pavilion Waterfront Park, Kiley 

Expansion 

Gardens Repair 

1 

7 

8 

10 

9 

11 12 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

Figure 6.3 Tampa Bay Area Skanska Projects 






(continued) 

Local Subcontractors 

St. Petersburg and Pinellas County offer a wealth of resources in 

the construction industry. Skanska is committed to collaborating 

with local subcontractors on the construction of the new Pier. 

Figures 6.5 and 6.6 are images of two recent projects completed 

with high levels of local business participation. Port Canaveral 

Cruise Terminal No. 6, completed in August 2012, achieved 82% 

local business participation, while the ongoing Florida Polytech 

project has already achieved 78% local business participation. 

Figure 6.7 describes a database of local Pinellas County 

subcontractors, the master list of which includes over 1,200 

companies specifically from Pinellas County. 

Community Partnership and Sponsoring Events 

Hand in hand with promoting local participation is the Skanska 

Ward commitment to reinvesting in the community, evidenced 

by a long history of partnering with, and giving back to, key 

clients through the support of numerous events, causes and 

fundraisers. The following highlights are examples of the firms’ 

community involvement events. 

• Ronald McDonald House 

Fishing for Hearts Tournament 

• St. Petersburg Christian School 

Annual Golf Tournament 

• All Children’s Hospital Event 

Big Catch for Kids Fishing Tournament 

Annual Gala Event 

• Tampa General Hospital Fundraising 

Golf Tournament 

Clay Shooting 

Valentine’s Day event 

Supers Reading with Santa 

• Tampa Museum of Art 

Fishing Tournament 

Pavilion Gala Event 

• USF Fishing Tournament 

• American Cancer Society 

Cattle Baron’s Ball 

• Florida Polytechnic Tilt Event 

• Walk to Defeat ALS - Tampa 

• Corporate 5k - Orlando 

• Moffitt Cancer Center 

• Miles for Moffitt 

• Callahan Tire Pro Am Tournament 

• Key for the Cure Event 

6 - 12 


pa Bay Region City of St. Petersburg Pinellas County 

Skanska's Tampa Office 

Employees Area of Residence 

City Tampa of St. Bay Petersburg Region and City of St. Petersburg Pinellas County 

Pinellas County 

20% 

8% 

8% 

12% 

12% 

Figure 6.4 Areas of Residence of Skanska’s Tampa Employees 

Figure 6.5 Port Canaveral Cruise Terminal No. 6 

80% 

80% 

03200-Concrete Reinforcement 

Bar-Fab of FL., Inc. (727) 572-6669 Clearwater FL 

Block-Busters Of Pinellas Park Inc. (727) 397-0746 Seminole FL 

IROK Constructional Services (727) 320-5286 St. Petersburg FL 

J.B. Bromley Construction, Inc. (727) 224-2966 Pinellas Park FL 

Mark 1 Contracting, Inc. (727) 894-3600 St. Petersburg FL 

Par Builders 

(727) 532-6111 

Stalba Construction (727) 363-1400 

Suncoast Builders Development Inc. (727) 848-3200 New Port Richey FL 

United Steel Works, Inc. (727) 572-6669 Clearwater FL 

03205-Rebar Erection/ Rodbusting 


03330-Architectural Concrete 

E.L. Shearer Concrete (727) 548-7959 Pinellas Park FL 


03350-Concrete Finishing 

A & B Concrete Concepts (727) 237-4048 New Port Richey FL 


Par Builders 

(727) 532-6111 


03380-Post-Tensioned Concrete 

Carr & Sons Masonry, Inc. (727) 526-9585 Pinellas Park FL 

MacDonald Builders Inc. (727) 502-0240 St. Petersburg FL 


MasRam Construction Services (727) 330-7580 Clearwater FL 

Reinforced Structures Inc. (727) 447-2535 Clearwater FL 



03410-Precast Structural Concrete 

Caladesi Construction Company (727) 585-9945 Largo FL 

Concrete Erectors, Inc. (727) 321-6000 Saint Petersburg FL 


03470-Tilt-Up Precast Concrete 

Caladesi Construction Company (727) 585-9945 Largo FL 


Cocoa Masonry of Pinellas Co. (727) 573-3717 Clearwater FL 


P.J. Callaghan Co., Inc. (727) 573-2505 Clearwater FL 

Reinforced Structures Inc. (727) 447-2535 Clearwater FL 


03520-Lightweight Concrete Roof Insulation 

Pro-Crete Systems, Inc (727) 526-8090 Pinellas Park FL 

03552-Self-Leveling Toppings 


03930-Concrete Rehabilitation 


04000-MASONRY 

Bettencourt Construction, LLC (727) 656-5570 

FL 


Cortes Construction Services, LLC (727) 937-4700 Tarpon Springs FL 

E. L. Shearer Concrete & Masonry (727) 548-7959 Pinellas Park FL 


E/S CONCRETE SERVICE, INC. (727) 821-5029 

Florida Concrete & Masonry, Inc (727) 209-3526 St. Petersburg FL 

Gilbert & Byrd Masonry Contractors, I (727) 541-2662 Largo FL 

Ginty Construction, Inc. (727) 337-8377 St. Petersburg FL 


J & J Masonry 

(727) 247-2235 

JJ Masonry Construction Company (727) 247-2235 Holiday FL 

Mangan Masonry (727) 796-7272 Clearwater FL 

P.J. Callaghan Co., Inc. (727) 573-2505 Clearwater FL 

Par Builders 

(727) 532-6111 

Peter Glaser Construction, Inc. (727) 461-1166 Clearwater FL 

Rick Perry Masonry (727) 466-0840 Crystal Beach FL 

Southeast Granite Works (727) 667-5829 Palm Harbor, FL 



Suncoast Building CONTRACTORS (727) 623-1036 st.petersburg FL 

Suncoast Surfaces and Granite Inc (727) 847-6327 New Port Richey FL 

Zemke General Contracting, Inc. (727) 856-6600 Spring Hill FL 

04001-Masonry Contractor 



Daminato Enterprises LLC (727) 638-2254 St. Petersburg FL 

E/S CONCRETE SERVICE, INC. (727) 821-5029 

Gilbert & Byrd Masonry Contractors, I (727) 541-2662 Largo FL 

Ginty Construction, Inc. (727) 337-8377 St. Petersburg FL 


J & J Masonry 

(727) 247-2235 


JJ Masonry Construction Company (727) 247-2235 Holiday FL 

Mangan Masonry (727) 796-7272 Clearwater FL 

MasRam Construction Services (727) 330-7580 Clearwater FL 

Par Builders 

(727) 532-6111 

Rainbow Concrete & Masonry (727) 327-9499 St. Petersburg FL 

Rick Perry Masonry (727) 466-0840 Crystal Beach FL 



United Tile Contractors of Florida, Inc (727) 834-8453 New Port Richey FL 

Figure 6.6 Florida Polytech 

Figure 6.7 Sample Database of Pinellas County Subcontractors 






(continued) 

• Annual Golf Tournament 

Magnolia Ball 

Cure on Wheels 

• Miami Corporate 5k Run 

• Make A Wish Foundation Walk 

• Coral Springs Medical Center 5k Run 

• Pasco Hernando Community College 

Annual Golf Tournament 

Annual Fishing Tournament 

• Hillsborough Community College 

• Presidential Showcase 

Annual Foundation Golf Tournament 

• Lee Memorial Hospital 

• Cancer Care by the Gulf Coast Medical Center Team 

• Sarasota Memorial Hospital 

Annual Gala 

Walk in October 

• United Way Campaign (through United Way of North 

Central Florida) 

• Harvest Drive for Broward County 

• Broward Health Foundation 

Glam Doll Strut 

6 - 14 


PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE 



2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 

ID ID 



J A SOC 

Basis Basis of Design of Design Phase Phase 

BD-0010 BD-0010 Public Outreach Public Outreach & Input& Input 42 01JUN12* 42 01JUN12* 31JUL12 31JUL12 Public Outreach Public Outreach & Input& Input 

BD-0020 BD-0020 Programming Programming 34 02JUL12* 34 02JUL12* 17AUG12 17AUG12 Programming Programming 

BD-1010 BD-1010 Presentations Presentations by Shortlisted by Shortlisted CMs CMs 1 17JUL12* 1 17JUL12* 17JUL12 17JUL12 Presentations Presentations by Shortlisted by Shortlisted CMs CMs 

BD-1011 BD-1011 Award Project Award Project 1 18JUL12 1 18JUL12 18JUL12 18JUL12 Award Award Project Project 

BD-0060 BD-0060 Basis of Basis Design of Design Rpt - to Rpt Include - to Include Final Cost Final Plan Cost Plan 97 19JUL12 97 19JUL1204DEC12 

04DEC12 

Basis of Basis Design of Design Rpt - to Rpt Include - to Include Final Cost Final Plan Cost Plan 

Schematic Schematic Design Design Phase Phase 

SD-0020 SD-0020 Constructability Constructability & Cost & Plan Cost Review Plan Review 55 05DEC12 55 05DEC121FEB13 

21FEB13 

Constructability Constructability & Cost & Plan Cost Review Plan Review 

SD-0010 SD-0010 50% Schematic 50% Schematic Design Design Submission Submission 55 05DEC12 55 05DEC121FEB13 

21FEB13 

SD-0030 SD-0030 Schematic Schematic Design Design Phase Estimate Phase Estimate & Cost & Review Cost Review 20 22FEB13 20 22FEB1321MAR13 

21MAR13 

SD-0040 SD-0040 100% Schematic 100% Schematic Design Design 57 23JAN13 57 23JAN1311APR13 

11APR13 

SD-0050 SD-0050 Submittal SD Submittal Including Including Final SD Final Estimate SD Estimate 0 0 11APR13 11APR13 

Design Design Development Phase Phase 

DD-0020 DD-0020 Constructability Constructability Review Review 21 12APR13 21 12APR13 10MAY13 10MAY13 

DD-0010 DD-0010 50% Design 50% Design Development Development Submission Submission 30 12APR13 30 12APR13 23MAY13 23MAY13 

DD-0030 DD-0030 Design Design Development Development Phase Estimate Phase Estimate & Cost & Update Cost Update 20 03MAY13 20 03MAY131MAY13 

31MAY13 

DD-0040 DD-0040 100% Design 100% Design Development Development Submission Submission 28 24MAY13 28 24MAY13 03JUL13 03JUL13 

DD-0050 DD-0050 Submittal DD Submittal Including Including Final DD Final Estimate DD Estimate 0 0 03JUL13 03JUL13 

Geotechnical / Wind / Wind / Wave / Wave Studies Studies 

SD-0015 SD-0015 Bid/Award Bid/Award Geotech Geotech Survey/Fndn Survey/Fndn Borings Borings (Skanska) (Skanska) 22 05DEC12 22 05DEC12 07JAN13 07JAN13 

SD-0065 SD-0065 Wind Studies Wind Studies (Arch/Engr) (Arch/Engr) 132 05DEC12 132 05DEC12 11JUN13 11JUN13 

SD-0070 SD-0070 Wave Studies Wave Studies (Arch/Engr) (Arch/Engr) 132 05DEC12 132 05DEC12 11JUN13 11JUN13 

SD-0025 SD-0025 Geotech Geotech Survey Survey & Fndn & Borings Fndn Borings (Skanska) (Skanska) 88 08JAN13 88 08JAN1309MAY13 

09MAY13 

SD-0035 SD-0035 Issue Geotech Issue Geotech Survey/Fndn Survey/Fndn Borings Borings Rpt (Skanska) Rpt (Skanska) 22 10MAY13 22 10MAY13 11JUN13 11JUN13 

Construction Document Document Phase Phase 

CD-0020 CD-0020 Constructability Constructability Review Review 21 05JUL13 21 05JUL1302AUG13 

02AUG13 

CD-0010 CD-0010 50% Construction 50% Construction Document Document Submission Submission 46 05JUL13 46 05JUL1309SEP13 

09SEP13 

CD-0030 CD-0030 50% CD 50% Phase CD - Phase Initial - GMP Initial Submission GMP Submission 12 22AUG13 12 22AUG13 09SEP13 09SEP13 

CD-0040 CD-0040 100% Construction 100% Construction Document Document Submission Submission 53 10SEP13 53 10SEP13 21NOV13 21NOV13 

CD-0050 CD-0050 Final GMP Final GMP 32 01NOV13 32 01NOV13 17DEC13 17DEC13 

CD-0051 CD-0051 Award Contracts Award Contracts / Buyout / Buyout 22 18DEC13 22 18DEC13 20JAN14 20JAN14 

Permitting Permitting 

50% Schematic 50% Schematic Design Design Submission Submission 

Schematic Schematic Design Design Phase Estimate Phase Estimate & Cost & Review Cost Review 

100% Schematic 100% Schematic Design Design 

SD Submittal SD Submittal Including Including Final SD Final Estimate SD Estimate 



Design Design Development Development Phase Estimate Phase Estimate & Cost & Update Cost Update 


DD Submittal DD Submittal Including Including Final DD Final Estimate DD Estimate 

Bid/Award Bid/Award Geotech Geotech Survey/Fndn Survey/Fndn Borings Borings (Skanska) (Skanska) 

Wind Studies Wind Studies (Arch/Engr) (Arch/Engr) 

Wave Studies Wave Studies (Arch/Engr) (Arch/Engr) 

Geotech Geotech Survey Survey & Fndn & Borings Fndn Borings (Skanska) (Skanska) 

Issue Geotech Issue Geotech Survey/Fndn Survey/Fndn Borings Borings Rpt (Skanska) Rpt (Skanska) 



50% CD 50% Phase CD - Phase Initial - GMP Initial Submission GMP Submission 


Final GMP Final GMP 

Award Award Contracts Contracts / Buyout / Buyout 

SD-0055 Activity SD-0055 Activity SWFWMD SWFWMD Permitting Permitting Activity Activity 

261* 01NOV12* 261* 01NOV12* 08NOV13 08NOV13 

SWFWMD SWFWMD Permitting Permitting 

SD-0045 SD-0045 US Army US Corps Army of Corps Engineer of Engineer Permitting Permitting 289 21JAN13* 289 21JAN13* 07MAR14 07MAR14 

2012 2012 2013 2013 US Army 2014 US Corps Army 2014 of Corps Engineer of Engineer Permitting 2015 Permitting 2015 

ID ID 



J A SOC 

SD-0060 SD-0060 Coast Guard Coast Permitting Guard Permitting 289 21JAN13* 289 21JAN13* 07MAR14 07MAR14 

Coast Guard Coast Permitting Guard Permitting 




Finish Demolition Date Finish Demolition Date Phase Phase 

17AUG15 17AUG15 


01MAY12 01MAY12 


DE-0010 DE-0010 Close Existing Close Existing Pier Pier 22 01MAY13* 22 01MAY13* 31MAY13 31MAY13 

Close Existing Close Existing Pier Pier 



DE-0011 DE-0011 Demo Inverted Demo Inverted Pyramid Pyramid (Above (Above Water) Water) 27 03AUG13 27 03AUG13 30AUG13 30AUG13 

Demo Inverted Demo Inverted Pyramid Pyramid (Above (Above Water) Water) 

St. Petersburg St. Petersburg Municipal Municipal Pier Replacement Pier Project Project 

DE-0012 DE-0012 Demo Existing Demo Existing Pier (Below Pier (Below Water) Water) 63 03SEP13 63 03SEP13 29NOV13 29NOV13 

Demo Existing Demo Existing Pier (Below Pier (Below Water) Water) 

Design Design & Construction & Schedule Schedule 

Construction © Phase Primavera © Phase Primavera Systems, Systems, Inc. Inc. 

CO-0010 CO-0010 Execute Execute GMP GMP 0 21JAN14 0 21JAN14 

Execute Execute GMP GMP 

CO-0022 CO-0022 Setup Survey Setup Survey Control Control Piers Piers 10 21JAN14 10 21JAN1403FEB14 

03FEB14 

Setup Survey Setup Survey Control Control Piers Piers 

CO-0021 CO-0021 Mobilize Mobilize & Setup & Environmental Setup Environmental Controls Controls 20 21JAN14 20 21JAN1417FEB14 

17FEB14 

Mobilize Mobilize & Setup & Environmental Setup Environmental Controls Controls 

CO-0023 CO-0023 Test Piles Test / Load Piles Test / Load Test 10 04FEB14 10 04FEB1417FEB14 

17FEB14 

Test Piles Test / Load Piles Test / Load Test 

CO-0024 CO-0024 Install Pier Install / Marina Pier / Marina Fndns & Fndns Bridge & Platform Bridge Platform 132 18FEB14 132 18FEB1422AUG14 

22AUG14 Install Pier Install / Marina Pier / Marina Fndns & Fndns Bridge & Bridge Platform Platform 

CO-0026 CO-0026 Install Elevated Install Elevated Pathway Pathway / Crown / / Crown Pier Fndns / Pier Fndns 132 18FEB14 132 18FEB1422AUG14 

22AUG14 Install Elevated Install Elevated Pathway Pathway / Crown / Crown / Pier Fndns / Pier Fndns 

CO-0031 CO-0031 Offsite Offsite Prefab Prefab Crown Architectural Crown Architectural Elements Elements 120 09JUN14 120 09JUN1425NOV14 

25NOV14 

Offsite Offsite Prefab Prefab Crown Crown Architectural Architectural Elements Elements 

CO-0025 CO-0025 Install Lower Install Pathways Lower Pathways 110 23JUN14 110 23JUN1425NOV14 

25NOV14 

Install Lower Install Pathways Lower Pathways 

CO-0027 CO-0027 Install Bridge/Elevated Install Bridge/Elevated Pathway Pathway & Arch & Elements Arch Elements 110 23JUN14 110 23JUN1425NOV14 

25NOV14 

Install Bridge/Elevated Install Bridge/Elevated Pathway Pathway & Arch & Elements Arch Elements 

CO-0028 CO-0028 Construct Construct Observation Observation Areas Areas 66 25SEP14 66 25SEP14 29DEC14 29DEC14 

Construct Construct Observation Observation Areas Areas 

CO-0029 CO-0029 Construct Construct Marina Marina Sections Sections 88 26NOV14 88 26NOV14 01APR15 01APR15 

Construct Construct Marina Marina Sections Sections 

CO-0030 CO-0030 Erect Crown Erect Crown 144 26NOV14 144 26NOV14 19JUN15 19JUN15 

Erect Crown Erect Crown 

CO-0032 CO-0032 Substantial Substantial Completion Completion 0 0 19JUN15 19JUN15 

Substantial Substantial Completion Completion 

CO-0034 CO-0034 Final Completion Final Completion 20 22JUN15 20 22JUN1520JUL15 

20JUL15 

Final Completion Final Completion 

CO-0040 CO-0040 Close Out Close - Grand Out - Opening Grand Opening 20 21JUL15 20 21JUL1517AUG15 

17AUG15 

Close Out Close - Grand Out - Opening Grand Opening 

MICHAEL MALTZAN ARCHITECTURE, INC. 6 - 15 


Finish Date Finish Date 

01MAY12 01MAY12 STP3 STP3 Sheet 2 of Sheet 2 2 of 2 

17AUG15 17AUG15

7OPERATING 

EXPENSE AND 

MAINTENANCE ESTIMATES

OPERATING EXPENSE AND 

MAINTENANCE ESTIMATES 

This section is intended to provide insight into the anticipated 

operating costs, revenue potential, and resulting subsidies 

required to operate the new Pier. Based on the escalation of 

operating costs and compression of revenues at the current 

Pier over the last 10 years, the new Pier’s operating costs and 

beneficial design efficiencies have been carefully considered. 

While full estimates are included in Appendix N, It is important 

to note that the information provided in this section as well as in 

the Appendix is intended to provide a rough order of magnitude 

in terms of anticipated costs. Major considerations for the 

project and estimate presented here include: 

• The opportunity for sustainable design and conservation 

measures to inform the design and reduce energy use. 

• A forty percent reduction in overwater footprint 

between the existing and new Piers, thereby reducing 

operating expenses 

• Reduced tenant and common area square footage 

means less unrecovered maintenance and operating 

costs. 

• Encased utilities assure safer, lower maintenance 

operations for all common utilities. 

• While the new Pier is fully ADA compliant and trolley 

capable, visitor vehicles will not be allowed, resulting 

in lower maintenance and substantial improvement to 

environmental conditions, both above the surface of 

the water as well as in the bay, where toxic runoff will no 

longer have an impact. The new Pier provides activities 

and engagement for pedestrians, cyclists and all other 

patrons along its journey, looking to the future while 

simultaneously taking a cue from our pedestrian pier 

past. 

• A larger restaurant space is to be land-based, reducing 

both short term construction costs and long term 

operating costs (for both tenant based and common 

area-unrecoverable based). 

• The new Pier will still require a certain level of security 

and a trolley service, both of which are existing 

expenses. 

Future revenues from the new Pier have great positive potential. 

Baseline revenues from typical leasing opportunities include 

restaurant and retail spaces. These revenues are supplemented 

by very conservative estimates from special event revenues and 

fees at the iconic Lens structure, such as wedding receptions, 

special events and parties. While these revenues, along with 

standard commercial revenues, have been conservatively 

estimated, it is important to recognize the upside potential to 

grow these figures. 



7 OPERATING EXPENSE AND MAINTENANCE ESTIMATES 

OPERATING EXPENSE AND 

MAINTENANCE ESTIMATES 

(continued) 

While fiscal year 2011 expenses for the Pier were $2,443,000, the 

ten year average expenses were $2,868,000. The new Pier’s initial 

projected expense level is $961,980, with a 10 year average of 

$1,066,878. Factoring in conservative revenue estimates, the new 

Pier’s initial subsidy level is $592,840 in 2016 (with a projected 

10 year average of $666,356), substantially less than the current 

pier’s 10 year average subsidy of $1,425,000. Revenues in 2016 

are estimated to be $369,140, with a projected 10 year average 

of $400,522. 

Appendix N provides an analysis of operating and maintenance 

costs for the project, prepared by Willis Construction Estimating, 

Inc. The Report includes tables containing a revenue forecast, a 

maintenance cost forecast, and a replacement schedule. 

Willis Construction Consulting, Inc. is an estimating company 

with in-house estimators for civil, structural, architectural, 

mechanical, and electrical trades for the purpose of providing 

construction cost estimates, feasibility estimates, program 

estimates, and life cycle and operating cost estimates for 

architects, general contractors, developers, and owners, among 

others. An acute working knowledge of critical elements, such 

as project size, location, design, construction market conditions 

and other factors that directly impact project cost, allows Willis 

to address individual client needs, while giving clients control of 

project costs throughout all phases of the project life cycle. 

Based in Florida, Willis Construction provides services for both 

national and international projects, including many local clients 

in Tampa, such as the Florida Aquarium, the James A. Haley VA 

Hospital, MacDill Joint Systems Command Headquarters, and 

Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority. 

From 2006 through 2011 Willis Construction estimated over 

twelve billion dollars in construction costs for clients. 

7 - 2 



CLIENT 

City of St. Petersburg 

175 5th Street North 


T: 727 893 7111 

www.stpete.org 

ARCHITECT 

Michael Maltzan Architecture, Inc. 

2801 Hyperion Avenue, Studio 107 

Los Angeles, California 90027 

T: 323 913 3098 

www.mmaltzan.com 

STRUCTURAL, CIVIL, MEP, CODE CONSULTING/ 

FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY ENGINEER 

Buro Happold 

100 Broadway, 23 rd Floor 

New York, New York 10005 

T: 212 334 2025 

www.burohappold.com 

9601 Jefferson Boulevard, Suite B 

Culver City, California 90232 

T: 310 945 4800 

ASSOCIATE ARCHITECT 

Wannemacher Jensen Architects, Inc. 

180 Mirror Lake Drive North 


T: 727 822 5566 

www.wjarc.com 

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 

Tom Leader Studio 

1015 Camelia Street 

Berkeley, California 94710 

T: 510 524 3363 

www.tomleader.com 

MARINA ENGINEER 

Applied Technology Management 

5550 NW 111 th Boulevard 

Gainesville, Florida 32653 

T: 386 418 6400 

www.appliedtm.com 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 

Janicki Environmental, Inc. 

1155 Eden Isle Drive NE 


T: 727 895 7722 

www.janickienvironmental.com 

MARINE ENGINEER 

McLaren Engineering Group 

5728 Major Boulevard, Suite 603 

Orlando, Florida 32819 

T: 407 354 3466 

www.mgmclaren.com 

LIGHTING CONSULTANT 

L’Observatoire International 

120 Walker Street 7th Floor East 

New York, New York 10013 

T: 212 255 4463 

www.lobsintl.com 

CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 

Skanska USA Building Inc. 

4950 West Kennedy Boulevard 

Tampa, Florida 33609 

T: 813 282 7100 

www.skanska.com 

PROJECT ADVISOR 

Pete Karamitsanis 

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING 

Moffat & Nichol Engineers 

1509 W. Swann Avenue, Suite 225 

Tampa, Florida 33606 

T: 813 258 8818 

www.moffattnichol.com 

OPERATING EXPENSE ANALYSIS 

Willis Construction Consulting, Inc. 

2200 Lucien Way, Suite 204 

Maitland, Florida 32751 

T: 407 352 0107 

www.willisestimating.com

MICHAEL MALTZAN ARCHITECTURE, INC. 

2801 Hyperion Avenue, Studio 107 

Los Angeles, California 90027 

T: 323 913 3098 F: 323 913 5932 

www.mmaltzan.com

Book 1 - City of St. Petersburg

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?